https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68001
Bug ID: 68001
Summary: [cilkplus] ICE in cp_gimplify_expr, at
cp/cp-gimplify.c:760
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67998
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
I don't think gcc supports using more than half the address space in a single
allocation. At least I've seen reports of bugs in the past, and I seem to
remember people not being very concerned...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
ssize_t is a signed integer and in the case of x86, it is 32bits which means
exactly what Marc wrote.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68000
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Independently of hoisting,
mov eax, edx
add edx, 1
add eax, 1
apparently we fail to CSE this because at the time of CSE, one addition is done
in mode QI and the other in SI, and it is only i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab ---
Did you mean ptrdiff_t?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67177
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67908
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67055
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at zahlenfresser dot
de
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68002
Bug ID: 68002
Summary: retaining unused static functions at -O1
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
Interesting. In particular, this means that the warning "Argument 'size' of
function malloc has a fishy (possibly negative) value" from valgrind is a
serious thing. Is this gcc limitation documented so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67994
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67995
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
*** Bug 67994 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68003
Bug ID: 68003
Summary: Variable declared in condition in for loop is
destroyed too soon
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67996
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67177
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #2)
> (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> > Confirmed for 5.2 and trunk (6.0). Note that it is in general better to post
> > the non working test rather th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68003
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51553
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Jason, is this resolution definitely correct? Clang and EDG agree with GCC 4.6
here, and [over.best.ics] does seem relevant.
Maybe related, maybe not. G++ also rejects:
struct A {
explicit operator bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68002
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67987
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sat Oct 17 16:50:47 2015
New Revision: 228933
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228933&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-10-17 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/67987
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68004
Bug ID: 68004
Summary: mails from mail.ru blocked
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68005
Bug ID: 68005
Summary: internal compiler error with -O3 -g -fopenmp
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.7
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68005
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68006
Bug ID: 68006
Summary: [6 Regression] [C++14] Incorrect aggregate
initialization from empty initializer list with NSDMI
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68005
--- Comment #2 from Travis Askham ---
Newer versions work (I tried 4.8.4 on a personal machine). Will request an
update from my sysadmin...
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68004
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #12 from wmi at google dot com ---
Yes, I agree it is a problem that memrefs_conflict_p doesn't take effect. But I
am still wondering even if memrefs_conflict_p doesn't take effect, the alias
oracle query in rtx_refs_may_alias_p should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68007
Bug ID: 68007
Summary: False warning for integer overflow for unsigned
integers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68005
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68004
--- Comment #2 from Fiodar ---
(In reply to Mikhail Maltsev from comment #1)
> Hi. Do I understand correctly, that you are were trying to post a message to
> the gcc-help mailing list via mail.ru SMTP server and it got bounced?
>
> See https://s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68007
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68004
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25844
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67924
deng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921
bin.cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
35 matches
Mail list logo
