https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
--- Comment #11 from __vic ---
Main problem hides in src/c++11/cow-string-inst.cc here:
namespace std _GLIBCXX_VISIBILITY(default)
{
_GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
// These came from c++98/misc-inst.cc, repeat them for COW string
// strin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65841
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65757
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 22 Apr 2015, prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
>
> --- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Hi,
> I tried to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
Bug ID: 65856
Summary: -Wsuggest-override shall not report a warning on final
method
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65851
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65855
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65851
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65850
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
And BTW both clang and EDG warn for the first example:
foo.cpp:6:16: warning: 'B::f' hides overloaded virtual function
[-Woverloaded-virtual]
virtual void f() final;
^
foo.cpp:2:16: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
I forgot to add "with -Wall -Wextra". gcc needs explicit -Woverloaded-virtual.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65851
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
We are transitioning from known-bits (likely alignment) to an invariant (thus
constant). Most of the cases this happens because of too weak UNDEFINED
handling.
I suppose we should finally punt in making tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65851
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 35389
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35389&action=edit
reduced test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53131
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61534
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47701
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65851
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, so it goes like
Visiting PHI node: f_12 = PHI <0B(2), f_8(5)>
Argument #0 (2 -> 6 executable)
0B Value: CONSTANT 0B
Argument #1 (5 -> 6 not executable)
PHI node value: CONSTA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65844
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65857
Bug ID: 65857
Summary: combine won't generate zero-extend from HImode memory
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65857
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
The pattern it tries has the load of a in it. Not sure what you are
expecting...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65857
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65857
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #8 from ramana.radhakrishnan at arm dot com ---
On 23/04/15 09:18, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
> What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60322
--- Comment #8 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Thu Apr 23 11:32:00 2015
New Revision: 222361
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222361&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2015-04-23 Andre Vehreschild
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #3)
> Hi,
> I tried to reproduce the error with a reduced test-case:
>
> #include "arm_neon.h"
>
> float32x2_t a, b, c, e;
>
> int main()
> {
> e = __builtin_neo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #10 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> (In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #3)
> > Hi,
> > I tried to reproduce the error with a reduced test-case:
> >
> > #include "arm_neon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
>
> --- Comment #10 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
--- Comment #20 from v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #21 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #20)
> Juergen, could you meanwhile check, that the patch fixes the issue?
Damn, it seems my text didn't get posted. Being in Japan at the moment, and
sometimes not having th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58754
Bug 58754 depends on bug 57456, which changed state.
Bug 57456 Summary: [OOP] CLASS + CHARACTER ALLOCATE with typespec: For arrays,
the typespec is ignored
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57456
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51976
Bug 51976 depends on bug 57456, which changed state.
Bug 57456 Summary: [OOP] CLASS + CHARACTER ALLOCATE with typespec: For arrays,
the typespec is ignored
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57456
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57456
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #22 from Jürgen Reuter ---
One thing is:
allocate (foo (0:this%dim-1), source=this%get_integral())
where this is some derived type with integer component dim
and TBP get_integral which is a function
generic :: get_integral => get_in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #23 from Jürgen Reuter ---
The other failure occurs for
allocate (foo (this%n), source=this%bar)
where n is integer, foo has type
character(32), dimension(:), allocatable
and bar as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65858
Bug ID: 65858
Summary: ICE in varpool_node::get_constructor during chromium
build on arm-linux-gnueabihf with LTO during LINK
chrome
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #12 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #11)
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
> >
> > --- Comment #10 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65721
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 13:20:08 2015
New Revision: 222363
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222363&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65721
* name-lookup.c (do_class_using_decl): Complain about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65727
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 13:20:14 2015
New Revision: 222364
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222364&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65727
* semantics.c (maybe_resolve_dummy): Handle null retu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65727
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 13:21:22 2015
New Revision: 222368
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222368&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65727
* lambda.c (maybe_resolve_dummy): Handle null return.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59766
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 13:21:06 2015
New Revision: 222365
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222365&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/59766
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Do not flag friends with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65695
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 13:21:17 2015
New Revision: 222367
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222367&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65695
* cvt.c (cp_fold_convert): Avoid wrapping PTRMEM_CST
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65721
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 13:21:11 2015
New Revision: 222366
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222366&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65721
* name-lookup.c (do_class_using_decl): Complain about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #24 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Could you please post complete tests: i.e. triggering only the relevant error?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65727
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59766
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill ---
And 4.9.3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65721
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65695
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65848
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Sutton ---
> I think that is actually not so unfortunate. Statically asserting
> concept models has helped me find numerous issues in my own code.
> I'm glad to hear the proposal is being extended to cover this.
U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #13 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #12)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #11)
> > On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> >
> > > https://
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #25 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Example 1:
module foo
type :: t
integer :: n
real, dimension(:,:), allocatable :: val
contains
procedure :: make => t_make
generic :: get_int => get_int_array, get_int_element
p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
Assignee|unass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #26 from Dominiqu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65859
Bug ID: 65859
Summary: Optimizes out TLS variable called in a child function
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65860
Bug ID: 65860
Summary: Stringification of User Defined Literals
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: preproce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65345
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Apr 23 14:35:12 2015
New Revision: 222370
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222370&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/65345
* c-decl.c (set_labels_context_r): New function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65861
Bug ID: 65861
Summary: libstdc++ is silently generating wrong code when its
std::search is given an input iterator
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26702
--- Comment #11 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Author: ramana
Date: Thu Apr 23 14:49:45 2015
New Revision: 222371
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222371&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR target/26702
For Kwok Cheung Yeung.
Added:
trunk/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26702
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65859
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65861
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/ext_compile_checks.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65861
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is user error, std::search() requires forward iterators and the library is
not required to diagnose it. Defining _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS causes it to be
rejected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #27 from Jürgen Reuter ---
And Example #2 is:
module foo
type :: t
integer :: n
character(32), dimension(:), allocatable :: md5
contains
procedure :: init => t_init
end type t
contains
subroutine t_init (thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65861
--- Comment #3 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> This is user error, std::search() requires forward iterators and the library
> is not required to diagnose it. Defining _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS causes it
> to b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65861
--- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> This is user error, std::search() requires forward iterators and the library
> is not required to diagnose it. Defining _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS causes it
> to b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #28 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> And Example #2 is: ...
Confirmed too, but no ICE under debugger.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65861
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #3)
> Is the use of _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS well enough advertised in the
> documentation that we can expect the average developer to know to invoke it?
It's document
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65861
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And even if they don't read the libstdc++ documentation, std::search doesn't
work with input iterators, that's always been true:
https://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/search.html
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65646
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 15:55:11 2015
New Revision: 222376
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222376&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65646
* pt.c (check_explicit_specialization): Don't
SET
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50800
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 23 15:55:21 2015
New Revision: 222377
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222377&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/50800
* tree.c (strip_typedefs): Add remove_attributes par
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65862
Bug ID: 65862
Summary: [MIPS] IRA/LRA issue: integers spilled to
floating-point registers
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65862
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The kernel should have been compiled with -msoft-float and I thought it was.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65858
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Those two bugs seems to be caused by same issue. Unforutnately it is bit hard
to guess what it is coming from - it seems that we manage to store
error_mark_node into the LTO object file.
If you can patch your
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65862
--- Comment #2 from Robert Suchanek ---
That's correct. It was just easier to expose this problem by compiling the
kernel.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||link-failure
Status|ASSIG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65863
Bug ID: 65863
Summary: GCC does not compile with weird error messages
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65863
--- Comment #1 from Victor Porton ---
Linux victor.local 3.10-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.10.7-1 (2013-08-17) x86_64
GNU/Linux
with 32 bit userland
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65864
Bug ID: 65864
Summary: Consider emitting -Wswitch-bool less aggressively?
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65864
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
I think they should simply cast the controlling expression to int--that should
quash the warning. Does this workaround sound reasonable to them?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65865
Bug ID: 65865
Summary: [6 Regression] Bootstrap failure on x86
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65866
Bug ID: 65866
Summary: Wrong warning when using list-initialization:
operation on 'b' may be undefined [-Wsequence-point]
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65865
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
Helfer Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
If you want some real life examples, grep e.g. the Firefox source tree
for "final override" or "override final".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65863
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Victor Porton from comment #1)
> Linux victor.local 3.10-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.10.7-1 (2013-08-17) x86_64
> GNU/Linux
>
> with 32 bit userland
Try configure GCC with
./configure --prefix=/usr/loca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65854
Tom Honermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[c++-concepts] Type |[c++-concepts] Type
|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
--- Comment #7 from Helfer Thomas ---
can you give me the rationale of this usage ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Helfer Thomas from comment #7)
> can you give me the rationale of this usage ?
Performance.
See also -Wsuggest-final-types -Wsuggest-final-methods in the gcc manual.
Although Stroustrup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65805
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Thu Apr 23 19:07:52 2015
New Revision: 222383
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222383&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-04-23 Vladimir Makarov
Backport from trunk r23.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65865
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
[hjl@gnu-6 gcc]$ cat /tmp/x.cc
extern unsigned long indirect_call_wrapper;
typedef unsigned long size_t;
template
F IndirectExternCall(F f) {
typedef F (*WrapF)(F);
return indirect_call_wrapper ? ((WrapF)i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65867
Bug ID: 65867
Summary: [5 Regression] bootstrap fails for mingw32 due to
missing header in ssp.c
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52085
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65865
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52251
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65757
--- Comment #8 from dhbbugs ---
Jerry DeLisl'e output is certainly not correct -- anint should invariably
return the nearest whole number. It should be the equivalent of this code:
if (x >= 0.0) then
anint = aint (x + 0.5)
else
anint = aint
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65863
Victor Porton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65868
Bug ID: 65868
Summary: "cannot find -lstdc++" for GNAT compilation
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: ada
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
