https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
--- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
>
> --- Comment #19 from Bill Schmidt ---
> I have a patch that solves this problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78355
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78348
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78355
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
if (!SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (mode, MEM_ALIGN (reg))
|| (MEM_ALIGN (reg) < GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (innermode)
&& SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (innermode, MEM_ALIGN (reg)))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78355
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> if (!SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (mode, MEM_ALIGN (reg))
> || (MEM_ALIGN (reg) < GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (innermode)
> && SLOW_UNALIGN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #35 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 40043
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40043&action=edit
stock /usr/include/os/trace.h from OS X 10.11.6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 40044
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40044&action=edit
fixincludes trace.h generated in stage 1
fixincludes trace.h generated in stage 1 on darwin15 using
https://gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #37 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 40045
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40045&action=edit
preprocessed source for sanitizer_mac.cc from stage3
preprocessed source for sanitizer_mac.cc from stage3 gener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78191
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |critical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
T.C. wrote: »decltype applied to an identifier declared by a decomposition
declaration returns the referenced type, which for the tuple-like case is the
exact type returned by std::tuple_element«
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #38 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
>
> --- Comment #35 from Jack Howarth ---
> Created attachment 40043
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40043&ac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #39 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth ---
> Created attachment 40044
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40044&action=edit
> fixincludes trace.h generated in stage 1
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #40 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #37 from Jack Howarth ---
> Created attachment 40045
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40045&action=edit
> preprocessed source for sanitizer_mac.cc fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #41 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #39)
> > --- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth ---
> > Created attachment 40044 [details]
> > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40044&ac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #42 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #41)
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #39)
> > > --- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth ---
> > > Created attachment 40044 [details]
> > > --> htt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
Chung-Lin Tang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cltang at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Huber ---
(In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #1)
> Sebastian, I'm not sure what your problem is. The atomics in nios2 are
> implemented by __sync_* functions placed in libgcc. The built-in function
> expansion
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #43 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #42)
> (In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #41)
> > (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #39)
> > Otherwise the definition of SANITIZER_OS_TRACE r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #44 from Maxim Ostapenko ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #41)
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #39)
> > > --- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth ---
> > > Created attachment 40044 [details]
> > > -->
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78355
--- Comment #4 from pipcet at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> if (!SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (mode, MEM_ALIGN (reg))
> || (MEM_ALIGN (reg) < GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (innermode)
> && SLO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #2)
> I suspect it may be caused by Andre's r241885 ...
I may be wrong, though: It seems like reverting those changes does not solve
the problem.
Another candidate:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #46 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Don't forget:
> For the record, note that configuring gcc with --disable-libsanitizer
> replace an ICE with accept-invalid in pr44348.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #45 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #44 from Maxim Ostapenko ---
[...]
>> Otherwise the definition of SANITIZER_OS_TRACE results in
>> libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_mac.cc making calls to os_trace(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> > I suspect it may be caused by Andre's r241885 ...
>
> I may be wrong, though: It seems like reverting those changes does not solve
> the problem.
>
> Anothe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Revision r241433 works, but r241509 does not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78361
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78325
--- Comment #3 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
I have pushed it through `mips-mti-linux-gnu' regression testing, with
the big-endian o32 regular MIPS multilib. It does fix the regressions
listed and does not cause any new ones. Thanks for a quick ac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78350
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
--- Comment #16 from Venkataramanan ---
GCC7 added early treading pass and gimple thread pass before VRP. When I
disable these passes, tree-vrp is able to move the true block same as that of
GCC6.
It again the tree-if-convert causing the moved b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
--- Comment #17 from Venkataramanan ---
Looking at the check
red_cost < 0 && arc->ident == AT_LOWER)
|| (red_cost > 0 && arc->ident == AT_UPPER
The order if-combine created seem to be the best.
if (red_cost_86 < 0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78348
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, venkataramanan.kumar at amd dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
>
> --- Comment #17 from Venkataramanan ---
> Looking at the check
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78306
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, iblue at gmx dot net wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78306
>
> --- Comment #2 from Markus Fenske ---
> Thanks for the suggested workaround. Moving all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
--- Comment #19 from Venkataramanan ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #18)
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, venkataramanan.kumar at amd dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
> >
> > --- Comment #17 from Ven
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77383
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Ivchenko ---
I debugged it and I suspect that the problem is in tree_function_versioning
(which is used for making instrumented clones of all functions in MPX).
Deep inside the logic of tree_function_versioning we d
--build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
--with-ld=/usr/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-242408-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nographite-aarch64
Thr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78360
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
This points to a defect in the P0012R1 implementation:
markus@x4 tmp % cat facet.ii
struct locale;
template bool has_facet(const locale &) throw();
extern template bool has_facet(const locale &);
mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
--- Comment #21 from Bill Schmidt ---
Great, thanks. Just realized I need to add a test case yet -- should have this
on the list later today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60853
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This patch makes gfortran accept the code:
Index: gcc/fortran/interface.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/interface.c (Revision 242412)
+++ g
end=isl --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,jit,lto
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20161115 (experimental) (GCC)
$ build_ext/bin/g++ fail.cpp -fopenmp –g
fail.cpp: In lambda function:
fail.cpp:6:34: internal compiler error: in force_type_die, at dwarf2out.c:24864
for (int i = [](){ retur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77346
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #5)
> -fPIC -fno-stack protector
Did you copy your session verbatim in #c5? If so, -f(no-)stack-protector
apparently has nothing to do w/ the issue. Your cross-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78348
--- Comment #5 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Yes, I think so.
2016-11-15 14:49 GMT+03:00 rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78348
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78363
Andrey Guskov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |debug
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Guskov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #3 from Chung-Lin Tang ---
(In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #2)
> (In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #1)
> > Sebastian, I'm not sure what your problem is. The atomics in nios2 are
> > implemented by __sync_* functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Huber ---
(In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #3)
> (In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #1)
> > > Sebastian, I'm not sure what your problem is. The atomics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78363
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60853
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78359
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78319
--- Comment #4 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
I think this seems to be an issue with uninit pass.
The same behavior can be observed for following test-case on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu regardless of r241915.
(test-case is a slight m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77881
--- Comment #6 from Michael Matz ---
Author: matz
Date: Tue Nov 15 14:02:28 2016
New Revision: 242414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR missed-optimization/77881
* combine.c (simplify_compariso
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77881
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] |[5/6 Regression]
|Non-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78295
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 15 13:57:59 2016
New Revision: 242413
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242413&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78295
* gcc.dg/uninit-pr78295.c: Add -Wno-ps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78362
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #5 from Chung-Lin Tang ---
> I checked the code generation on some targets for the test case above. The
> arm, bfin, epiphany, i386, lm32, m68k, mips, moxie, sh, v850 targets
> generated all __atomic_* functions.
> Only on Nios II i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #6 from Sebastian Huber ---
(In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #5)
> > I checked the code generation on some targets for the test case above. The
> > arm, bfin, epiphany, i386, lm32, m68k, mips, moxie, sh, v850 targets
> > gener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #7 from Chung-Lin Tang ---
(In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #6)
> (In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #5)
> > > I checked the code generation on some targets for the test case above. The
> > > arm, bfin, epiphany, i386,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78348
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78364
Bug ID: 78364
Summary: [ARM] Error: bit-field extends past end of register --
ubfx
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #8 from Sebastian Huber ---
(In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #7)
> (In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #5)
> > > > I checked the code generation on some targets for the te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78341
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78292
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78333
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78114
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #8)
> > --- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> > But for tests:
> > FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/fast-math-mgrid-resid.f -O scan-tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77673
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Regressed with r211778 aka PR61517.
iled by gcc trunk dated 20161115,
revision 242408, and with compiler flag -O2, does this:
mklev.c:80:1: internal compiler error: in determine_value_range, at
tree-ssa-loo
p-niter.c:413
0xda4cb1 determine_value_range
../../trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-niter.c:413
0xda61f0 bound_dif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78363
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp, wrong-debug
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71988
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78364
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71988
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 15 15:21:49 2016
New Revision: 242426
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242426&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71988
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-71988.C: New test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78365
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 40049
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40049&action=edit
reduced C source code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78366
Bug ID: 78366
Summary: target_clones does not generate resovler function
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78364
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78349
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this is a known issue and intentionally not fixed on the GCC 5 branch
(but it is fixed for GCC 6).
N.B. GNU nm has a -C option to demangle so you don't need c++filt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #9 from Chung-Lin Tang ---
(In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #8)
> (In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #6)
> > > (In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #5)
> > > > > I c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78361
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78326
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See Bug 59002, this is one of the ones it depends on.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66227
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78313
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #0)
> +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #72774 +++
>
> // PR c++/72774
> // { dg-do compile }
>
> void baz ();
> namespace A { void foo (); }
> voi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Benson ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> (In reply to janus from comment #2)
> > I suspect it may be caused by Andre's r241885 ...
>
> I may be wrong, though: It seems like reverting those changes does not solv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78367
Bug ID: 78367
Summary: Out-of-line definitions fail to match in-line
declarations with decltype and template arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78365
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66227
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66227
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #4)
> The following patch fixes it:
... but unfortunately causes a failure of extends_type_of_3.f90 in the
testsuite, which means either:
* one of the tests in exten
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Nov 15 16:32:38 2016
New Revision: 242432
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242432&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/78358 - tuple decomposition decltype
* semantics.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70965
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78356
--- Comment #7 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fix at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-11/msg00140.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78362
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78341
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Shall we just remove the assertion?
Sounds good.
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo