https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68960
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for GCC 6+ so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69141
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69154
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69175
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69174
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I see also the second ICE rather than the first one. dr_chain is created for
ncopies == 3, but then we attempt to access indexes 2 and 3 in it. Richard,
can you please have a look?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69176
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69174
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
I wonder if the first ICE is due to not having checking enabled ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69172
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu |
|aarch64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69175
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In my cross compiler configured with checking I get an ICE earlier in ifcvt:
internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
}
^
0xc8e934 crash_signal
$SRC/gcc/toplev.c:334
0x8c89e5 rtl_ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69176
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66616
--- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor ---
Yesterday Honza told me on IRC to check that the new artificial thunk
has local flag set. However, it appears that it does (in
set_new_clone_decl_and_node_flags), so I am going to investigate
further.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69171
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Created attachment 37244 [details]
> A patch
The patch fixes the regressions
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/SFset.c -O1 (internal compiler error)
...
I saw on x86_64-apple-darwin15 without further
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69082
--- Comment #7 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Ah! And the maximum range of offset for these relocations in REL format is
-32768,+32767.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
--- Comment #28 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #27)
> ...so ragged in fact that it fails at all levels of optimization I
> have not had time these last days to come back to it and understand
> why
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69172
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37246
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37246&action=edit
gcc6-pr69172.patch
Untested fix. That said, the testcase is undefined behavior at runtime (both
because the sr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69167
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu |
|aarch64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60585
Andris Pavenis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69180
Bug ID: 69180
Summary: [ARM] #pragma GCC target should not warn about
redefined macros
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67639
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Jan 7 12:17:39 2016
New Revision: 232125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232125&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix SSA inconsistencies with invalid asm reg names (PR67639)
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69109
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
-funswitch-loops introduces degenerate phis in a loop latch (bb 9):
...
;; basic block 9, loop depth 1, count 0, freq 4900, maybe hot
;;prev block 8, next block 10, flags: (NEW, REACHABLE)
;;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50584
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69107
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
-funswitch-loops introduces a degenerate phi (.MEM_74) in the latch block (bb
13), which is not removed before parloops:
...
;; basic block 11, loop depth 1, count 0, freq 2500, maybe hot
;;pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69107
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69171
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69164
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68984
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69175
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at kernel dot
crashi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dilawar.s.rajput at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60407
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48891
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There are various ways to hit this issue, some of which mean it can be
considered a regression, because the same code compiled with older releases
(before we added the C++11 definitions of isinf/isnan) or w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69182
Bug ID: 69182
Summary: Internal compiler error, dwarf2out_frame_debug_expr,
at dwarf2cfi.c:1550
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69082
--- Comment #8 from PeteVine ---
I've just discovered this particular instance is not related to -flto at all
but rather to `-fprofile-generate -ftest-coverage`.
The previous assembly sample mentioned lto at least:
movwr4, #:lower16:_ZL13r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64946
mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69183
Bug ID: 69183
Summary: ICE when using OpenMP PRIVATE keyword in OMP DO loop
not explicitly encapsulated in OMP PARALLEL region
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66616
--- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor ---
So it was a near miss, the problem appears to be the
can_change_signature flag instead. The following seems to fix the
-m32 failure. I'm going to bootstrap it and if it passes, send it to
the mailing list.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69114
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Jan 7 15:01:33 2016
New Revision: 232129
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232129&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use std::addressof in insert iterators, allocators and promises
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69105
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Jan 7 15:01:33 2016
New Revision: 232129
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232129&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use std::addressof in insert iterators, allocators and promises
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69114
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69082
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #9 from Richard Earns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69106
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68758
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Ok, so re-running the whole test-suite shows that all Invalid read/write
operations related to GGC are gone.
I'm going to test the patch and send it to mailing list.
Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69161
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67755
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
It looks like a logic error in the case where we need to make sure there's
enough "count" going to the final block of jump thread path. I've got a patch,
but I'm still working through the code and the final
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69126
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Hi Jakub. I thought it was simply matter of using location_of instead of
DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION as I did in other places in that patch set, but in fact it
doesn't work, in order to avoid the spurious warning a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69044
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69169
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37253
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37253&action=edit
tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69184
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.4, 5.3.1
Target Miles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1078
--- Comment #13 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Thu Jan 7 18:02:25 2016
New Revision: 232136
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232136&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-07 Sandra Loosemore
PR 1078
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1078
--- Comment #14 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've finished going through the target-specific attributes. I filed new
target-specific issues for things that need attention from target maintainers:
PR 69151: h8300 "OS_Task", "monitor"
PR 6915
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69125
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69126
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
As far as I can tell:
* _Pragma is handled by _cpp_do__Pragma which injects pragma tokens into the
token stream
* the resulting "ignore" pragmas are handled by
gcc/c-family/c-pragma.c:handle_pragma_diagno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69161
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69126
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #5)
[...snip...]
> That said, the location of the token from _Pragma looks wrong; note the
> underlines here:
>
> Breakpoint 2, handle_pragma_diagnostic (dummy=) at
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69125
--- Comment #3 from Thiago Macieira ---
I'll be happy if the pragma issue is fixed, since then I can just inject the
_Pragma into the macro and make the problem go away.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69161
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #4)
> Ok, judging from this my simplistic patch from
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg00329.html
> is not appropriate
I think so. Also note that the testcas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69185
Bug ID: 69185
Summary: bounds-check gives false positive on assignment to
allocatable array
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68983
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69185
--- Comment #2 from Rich Townsend ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> It looks like a duplicate of pr52162. Unless you object I'll mark this PRas
> a duplicate in the coming days.
Agreed!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69176
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #7)
> > > I think the problem is the constraints on *add3_pluslong allows all
> > > immediates.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean here - there are 4 constraints that should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52162
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||townsend at astro dot wisc.edu
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69185
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69092
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69176
--- Comment #9 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #7)
> > > > I think the problem is the constraints on *add3_pluslong allows
> > > > all immediates.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what you me
-trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160107 (experimental) [trunk revision 232123] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 -c small.c
$ gcc-5.3 -O3 -c small.c
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 -c small.c
small.c: In function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69186
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68346
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69187
Bug ID: 69187
Summary: ICE: Aborted when native compiling neon code with
__builtin_neon_vmlals_lanev4hi
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69161
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt ---
I haven't debugged how it's created but I agree that we're looking at invalid
RTL here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63780
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14608
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14608
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gnu at bluedreamer dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44611
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68966
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Jan 8 01:00:25 2016
New Revision: 232147
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232147&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/68966 - atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed
gcc/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55139
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This was fixed for 4.8.0 by r193363, right?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68966
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55233
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Andi, this was fixed by r195321 and so can be closed, right?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59665
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60263
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60637
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks to PR 36757 __builtin_signbit is now generic, so this is fixed on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60637
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Severity|major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
Bug ID: 69188
Summary: ICE when linking objects at different optimization
levels with LTO and profile generation enabled.
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
--- Comment #1 from anthonyfk at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 37258
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37258&action=edit
Script used to reproduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
--- Comment #2 from anthonyfk at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 37259
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37259&action=edit
Source file 1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
--- Comment #3 from anthonyfk at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 37260
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37260&action=edit
Source file 2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
--- Comment #4 from anthonyfk at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 37261
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37261&action=edit
Source file 3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
--- Comment #5 from anthonyfk at gmail dot com ---
I forgot to mention, modifying the compile script in any of the following ways
prevents the ICE from occurring:
1. Compile all sources at same optimization levels.
2. Remove -fprofile-generate.
3
reduced preprocessed source attached. This is using 6.0.0
20160107, compiled with: g++-trunk -std=c++1z prepro.ii
Error & stacktrace:
prepro.ii: In substitution of 'template
{anonymous}::any_base::any_base(Value&&) requires predicate(
::no_special_members_interference<::any_base,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
--- Comment #6 from anthonyfk at gmail dot com ---
With the gcc-6-20160103 snapshot the line in lto-symtab.c changes from 143 to
119:
lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_varpool_replace_node, at
lto/lto-symtab.c:119
Please submit a full bug rep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61439
--- Comment #2 from daube ---
Hi all,
I've implemented checksum verification using the sha512sums published with
prerequisite tarballs on gcc.gnu.org. Please find the patch attached to this
ticket.
This would be my first contribution to GCC, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61439
--- Comment #3 from daube ---
Created attachment 37263
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37263&action=edit
Verify checksums of tarballs obtained with contrib/download_prerequisites
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 8 03:58:40 2016
New Revision: 232148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232148&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
shrink-wrap: Once more PRs 67778, 68634, and now 68909
If a candida
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68634
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 8 03:58:40 2016
New Revision: 232148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232148&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
shrink-wrap: Once more PRs 67778, 68634, and now 68909
If a candida
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67778
--- Comment #16 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 8 03:58:40 2016
New Revision: 232148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232148&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
shrink-wrap: Once more PRs 67778, 68634, and now 68909
If a candid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69175
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69190
Bug ID: 69190
Summary: FAIL:
experimental/type_erased_allocator/uses_allocator.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69145
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 8 06:43:31 2016
New Revision: 232150
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232150&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69145
* files.c (cpp_included_before): If IS_ADHOC_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69128
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 8 06:45:18 2016
New Revision: 232151
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232151&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/69128
* trans.h (OMPWS_SCALARIZER_BODY): Define
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
