https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #22)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #21)
> > On April 7, 2017 6:57:13 PM GMT+02:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
> > wrote:
> > >https://gcc.gnu.org/bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80387
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80386
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80385
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80388
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70878
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|spu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80387
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70878
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
I've got patch for that in testing process.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Apr 11 08:15:51 2017
New Revision: 246833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246833&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-02-10 Bin Cheng
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68021
--- Comment #18 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Apr 11 08:15:51 2017
New Revision: 246833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246833&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-02-10 Bin Cheng
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70167
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70167
--- Comment #2 from Ville Voutilainen ---
This has been suggested as a value category checker:
https://wandbox.org/permlink/rXQewIGjI2096UbA
There are two cases in it that print "Bug!" with gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80363
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 11 08:51:40 2017
New Revision: 246834
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246834&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80363
* error.c (dump_expr): Handle VEC_COND_EXPR l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 11 08:54:54 2017
New Revision: 246835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246835&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80381
* config/i386/i386-builtin-types.def
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80303
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80100
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
Bug ID: 80389
Summary: [7 Regression][ARM] -march=armv8-a and
-mcpu=cortex-a57 results in invalid .cpu assembly
directive
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80390
Bug ID: 80390
Summary: std::pair of aligned type gives bogus warning
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80391
Bug ID: 80391
Summary: seamonkey-2.46/mozilla/gfx/2d/DrawTargetTiled.cpp:158:
1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80385
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80391
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80391
--- Comment #2 from mmokrejs at gmail dot com ---
Hmm, I cannot due to ABI incopmpatibility.
However, the other reported also showe 5.2.1 was affected as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80391
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to mmokrejs from comment #2)
> Hmm, I cannot due to ABI incopmpatibility.
>
> However, the other reported also showe 5.2.1 was affected as well.
Still too old. gcc-5.4 was released over a ye
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80391
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
To clarify: I've downloaded his small testcase (which you should have attached
here). And all maintained gcc versions compile it fine. So the bug is fixed
already for gcc-5 and higher.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36831
--- Comment #6 from mmokrejs at gmail dot com ---
I am on Gentoo Linux but 5.4.0 is nevertheless still unavailable for general
("stable") users. For a good reason. And as I said, the ABI is not compatible.
I will try to reproduce this on another h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
--- Comment #8 from Sven Woop ---
Thanks a lot. Sven
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80283
--- Comment #13 from wilco at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It looks the x64 issue is unrelated. It starts with a bad schedule which could
be improved by the scheduler but that is off by default, while the ARM version
starts with a good schedule which is co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80385
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41173
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41173&action=edit
gcc7-pr80385.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36831
--- Comment #7 from mmokrejs at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to mmokrejs from comment #6)
> I am on Gentoo Linux but 5.4.0 is nevertheless still unavailable for general
> ("stable") users. For a good reason. And as I said, the ABI is not
> compatib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
Bug ID: 80392
Summary: ICE with allocatable polymorphic function result in a
procedure pointer component
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80393
Bug ID: 80393
Summary: class_replaceMethod() can modify the wrong class
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80386
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80394
Bug ID: 80394
Summary: Empty OpenMP task is wrongly removed when optimizing
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80386
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Yea, the fold call there is puzzling. Even a change in r67189 (old one!) had:
- /* Don't fold a COMPONENT_EXPR: if the operand was a CONSTRUCTOR (the
- only time it will fold), it can cause problems wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80387
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reverting that change is not an option. I might be able to add some sanity
checking to reject invalid cases.
What we really want is a builtin to generate the pack expansion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80394
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80394
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70878
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Apr 11 13:08:08 2017
New Revision: 246837
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246837&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not instrument register variables in object-size sanitizer (PR
sanitize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70878
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Known to fail|7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79718
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
*** Bug 79719 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79719
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79718
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80394
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41174
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41174&action=edit
gcc7-pr80394.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80395
Bug ID: 80395
Summary: verify_gimple fails with Error: invalid reference
prefix with -O3 -finline-functions
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #24 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Apr 11 13:23:48 2017
New Revision: 246838
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246838&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 77333] Fixup fntypes of gimple calls of clones
2017-04-11 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Apr 11 13:31:16 2017
New Revision: 246839
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246839&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 77333] Fixup fntypes of gimple calls of clones
2017-04-11 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69953
--- Comment #27 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 41176
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41176&action=edit
Patch I am testing
Hi,
I am testing the attached patch. This is but subtle issue, but I hope that it
works right
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80374
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 11 13:44:24 2017
New Revision: 246840
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246840&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-11 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/80374
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zeccav at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80395
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #4)
> Given how late in stage4 we are, I think rejecting TMR without trying to
> rewrite them into a regular MEM_REF is probably the best thing to do.
Agreed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80396
Bug ID: 80396
Summary: New builtin to make std::make_integer_sequence
efficient and scalable
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhanceme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80387
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
PR 80396 requests such a builtin.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, if there is a conflict between options, the backend should choose after
warning the more important from those unless it wants to error, and then
continue, so either change -march=armv8-a to something else
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80387
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This code isn't strictly ice-on-invalid, it's just completely crazy and no
compiler will ever handle it, because it asks for std::index_sequence<0, 1, 2,
3, ..., 18446744073709551614>.
We could add a stati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80100
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80387
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rearnsha at gcc dot
gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
--- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Tue Apr 11 14:57:41 2017
New Revision: 246843
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246843&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[arm] PR 80389 - if architecture and cpu mismatch, don't print an ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80389
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80354
--- Comment #5 from Stephan Bergmann ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #3)
> The warning does just what it's designed to do: point out the potential
> unhandled truncation.
But it is unusable in practice if there is no reliable way to s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80082
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Tue Apr 11 15:26:20 2017
New Revision: 246844
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246844&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR80082: LDRD erronously used for 64bit load on ARMv7-R
2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
I was looking at generated code (with -mtune=intel):
vpbroadcastd%edi, %zmm0 # 9 *avx512f_vec_dup_gprv16si/2
[length = 6]
movl%edi, %edi # 12*zero_extendsidi2/4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80364
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Apr 11 16:35:34 2017
New Revision: 246846
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246846&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/80364 - sanitizer detects signed integer overflow in
gimple-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80212
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Apr 11 16:37:31 2017
New Revision: 246847
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246847&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not create a constprop clone for calls_comdat_local nodes (PR ipa/80212
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80364
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80212
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Apr 11 16:38:19 2017
New Revision: 246848
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246848&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add function part to a same comdat group (PR ipa/80212).
2017-04-11 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80212
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80397
Bug ID: 80397
Summary: missing -Wformat-overflow with arguments of enum types
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80352
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Thomas, it seems from your description the problem really exists. I tried to
reproduce the problem with the test you provided but I've failed. I used
today trunk.
Could you provide more info (may be -m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80394
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 11 17:15:47 2017
New Revision: 246849
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246849&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgomp/80394
* omp-low.c (scan_omp_task): Don't optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80385
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 11 17:19:56 2017
New Revision: 246850
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246850&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/80385
* simplify-rtx.c (simplify_unary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80100
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 11 17:21:51 2017
New Revision: 246851
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246851&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/80100
* simplify-rtx.c (simplify_binary_oper
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80100
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80394
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed on the trunk so far, backports queued. Thanks for the report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80385
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] Segfault |[5/6 Regression] Segfault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80398
Bug ID: 80398
Summary: missing -Wattributes on a misplaced attribute packed
in an enum definition
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80349
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41178
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41178&action=edit
gcc7-pr80349.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80399
Bug ID: 80399
Summary: Premature optimization with unsigned
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80397
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80400
Bug ID: 80400
Summary: missing -Wattributes on a invalid attribute packed on
a typedef
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80400
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478
--- Comment #11 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Tue Apr 11 19:39:59 2017
New Revision: 246854
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246854&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-11 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/70478
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #13 from janus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 11 20:51:16 2017
New Revision: 246857
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246857&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80370
* decl.c (cp_finish_decomp): If processing_te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80401
Bug ID: 80401
Summary: [7 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/dimode_off.c and
gcc.target/powerpc/pr79038-1.c fail starting with
r246764
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80265
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #6)
> Hmm. I'd argue that __builtin_constant_p (s) should return true in that case,
> since we're in a constexpr?
No, the compiler is right; the address of the local a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80401
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc*-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80265
--- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #13)
> it seems better than abusing __builtin_constant_p, which is getting
> contradictory requirements from its various uses:
> - constexpr (forces very early lowering)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80315
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80401
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
That transformation will definitely degrade performance...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #9 from Peter Bergner ---
It seems you can call creduce multiple times and see some reduction. Here's a
reduced test case:
bergner@pike:~/gcc/BUGS/PR80382$ cat bug.ii
namespace a {
typedef enum {} b;
template struct g {
c d;
g(
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
