https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67142
Bug ID: 67142
Summary: [6 Regression] [C++1z] ICE: tree check: expected
template_decl, have field_decl in equal, at
cp/pt.c:1665
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351
--- Comment #33 from David Binderman ---
I found that using -g -O2 -Wall didn't enable this warning.
Some of the documentation says it does.
I can see that this new warning isn't ready for prime time yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67143
Bug ID: 67143
Summary: [5/6 Regression] ICE (could not split insn) on
aarch64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67144
Bug ID: 67144
Summary: [6 Regression] [C++1z] ICE; in get_constraints, at
cp/pt.c:23346
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66929
--- Comment #10 from Mikael Morin ---
Author: mikael
Date: Fri Aug 7 09:41:31 2015
New Revision: 226717
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226717&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix latent elemental wrong code
PR fortran/66929
gcc/fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66929
--- Comment #11 from Mikael Morin ---
Author: mikael
Date: Fri Aug 7 09:55:36 2015
New Revision: 226718
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226718&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix elemental wrong-code
PR fortran/66929
gcc/fortran/
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351
--- Comment #34 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #33)
> I found that using -g -O2 -Wall didn't enable this warning.
> Some of the documentation says it does.
Ops, you are right. I used the wrong EnabledBy()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67145
Bug ID: 67145
Summary: [6 Regression] Innefective plus-minus simplification
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #23 from David Abdurachmanov
---
GCC trunk
r226676
or 15af172f2a0ea281969e3105da9f9bb100097c7d from
git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
Date: Thu Aug 6 14:26:18 2015 +)
Rebased and applied:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patche
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67143
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67143
mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mwahab at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67144
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67142
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67104
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Another example
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31878796/removing-constexpr-changes-values-of-array-on-gcc
markus@x4 tmp % cat test.ii
template struct array
{
constexpr T &operator[](int index) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64104
--- Comment #4 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Fri Aug 7 15:02:15 2015
New Revision: 226723
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226723&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/64104
* expr.c (gfc_check_init_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64104
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67029
--- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Aug 7 16:18:09 2015
New Revision: 226724
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226724&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add alternative_mask to ira_implicitly_set_insn_hard_regs
Since i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66458
--- Comment #6 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Fri Aug 7 16:23:53 2015
New Revision: 226725
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226725&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libfortran/66458
* runtime/main.c (init):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67029
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 regression] gcc-5.2.0 |[5 Regression] gcc-5.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63473
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67146
Bug ID: 67146
Summary: Wchkp is not documented in invoke.texi
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63693
--- Comment #2 from rippey.e at gmail dot com ---
Tried with gcc 5.2.0. Same result (modulo line #'s, etc.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67147
Bug ID: 67147
Summary: [concepts] ICE on checking concept with default
template arguments
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351
--- Comment #35 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #34)
> (In reply to David Binderman from comment #33)
> > I found that using -g -O2 -Wall didn't enable this warning.
> > Some of the documentation says it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351
--- Comment #36 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
But those are *precisely* the ones that need deep investigation. That
investigation may find a real bug, it may find a relatively simple missed
optimization, complex missed optimizations or poor APIs.
It'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351
--- Comment #37 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #36)
> It's no different maybe uninitialized warnings.
Well, one can silence uninitialized warnings by simply initializing the
variable. I don't see how this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57839
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351
--- Comment #38 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #35)
> I fear this case might be quite common and lead to many false positives that
> are then quite hard to understand due to the poor location info in the
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55603
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351
--- Comment #39 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #38)
> It could even be the case that the "potential NULL" code gets
> put into some backwater flag away from -Wall, and, after a suitable period
> of more tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67148
Bug ID: 67148
Summary: [concepts] Failed concept check when indirecting
through a constrained trait
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61261
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51652
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
> > Fixed?
>
> Mostly for 4.8.3, 4.9.0, and trunk (4.10.0). The test in comment 0 does not
> compile with 4.8 (Deferred-length character component 'c' at (1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67148
--- Comment #1 from Eric Niebler ---
If I replace the variadic Same concept with the binary one below, the problem
goes away.
template
concept bool Same() {
return __is_same_as(T,U);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56670
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67002
--- Comment #23 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Fri Aug 7 20:41:25 2015
New Revision: 226726
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226726&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67002
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_recog_treg_set_expr): Return fal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42112
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67002
--- Comment #24 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Fri Aug 7 08:11:45 2015
New Revision: 226715
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226715&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67002
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_recog_treg_set_expr): Return fal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56730
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67149
Bug ID: 67149
Summary: false positive maybe-uniniialized in the presense of
cilk spawn
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61830
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57354
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66911
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57365
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52921
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67150
Bug ID: 67150
Summary: [c++-concepts] Expression constraint fails with
dependent types
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48997
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67151
Bug ID: 67151
Summary: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:12126
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66521
--- Comment #13 from Caroline Tice ---
I'm looking at your patch now; assuming I don't find any problems with it, I
will try to get it committed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67153
Bug ID: 67153
Summary: integer optimizations 53% slower than std::bitset<>
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67152
Bug ID: 67152
Summary: [concepts] bogus "partial specialization of ‘foo’
after instantiation" error
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67153
--- Comment #1 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
Created attachment 36147
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36147&action=edit
The unsigned int version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Sat Aug 8 01:51:27 2015
New Revision: 226731
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226731&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/67028
* combine.c (simplify_comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67154
Bug ID: 67154
Summary: sscanf does not extract correct value when the format
is "%c" and the location is of type int*
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67154
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67154
--- Comment #2 from wondertx at gmail dot com ---
You are right!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67155
Bug ID: 67155
Summary: Linking of complex constexpr static class member
failing across files
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67155
--- Comment #1 from James Michael DuPont ---
The compiler output :
g++ -std=gnu++11 test.cpp test.hpp
/tmp/cceBFmJM.o: In function `S::S()':
test.cpp:(.text+0x35): undefined reference to `S::u'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
Makefile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67155
--- Comment #2 from James Michael DuPont ---
adding this seems to solve the linker error:
constexpr CU S::u;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67155
James Michael DuPont changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67153
ncm at cantrip dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||Linux amd64
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67143
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67144
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67145
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67153
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67155
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
66 matches
Mail list logo
