https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80736
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80736
Daniel Frey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80442
Nicolas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80738
Bug ID: 80738
Summary: dead first stmt in a=0;a=b;b=0 whatever the aliasing
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: alias, missed-optimization
Severity: e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706
--- Comment #16 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Sun May 14 12:49:55 2017
New Revision: 248032
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248032&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2017-05-11 Uros Bizjak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80739
Bug ID: 80739
Summary: Accessing value of X through a Y glvalue in a constant
expression
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80740
Bug ID: 80740
Summary: Aliasing with the return value
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: alias, missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65696
--- Comment #2 from yuta tomino ---
Here is a proposing fix.
I has tried this patch with gcc from 4.8 to 7, and it seems to work fine with
all versions.
diff --git a/gcc/ada/exp_atag.adb b/gcc/ada/exp_atag.adb
index 587432c..4313446 100644
--- a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80674
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80741
Bug ID: 80741
Summary: incorrect behaviour of rewind with namelist
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80666
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80669
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80669
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Sun May 14 16:06:41 2017
New Revision: 248034
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248034&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/80669 - Bad -Wstringop-overflow warnings for stpncpy
gcc/Ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80674
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #2)
> Is it guaranteed for '!A || B'? Is it guaranteed that B will
> not be executed if !A is true?
Yes. See C FAQ.
http://c-faq.com/expr/shortcircuit.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80742
Bug ID: 80742
Summary: attribute target no- does not work
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80727
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80731
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77671
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77671
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77684
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
It doesn't look like r247962 resolves the failures. I continue to see them
with the top of trunk.
$ nice make -C /opt/notnfs/msebor/build/gcc-77671/gcc -j56
RUNTESTFLAGS='tree-prof.exp' check-c 2>&1 | grep F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77684
--- Comment #8 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
> The log shows the same errors:
> spawn [open ...]
> Permission error mapping pages.
> Consider increasing /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_mlock_kb,
> or try again with a smaller value of -m/--mmap_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80743
Bug ID: 80743
Summary: ice in estimate_node_size_and_ti me, at
ipa-inline-analysis.c:3385
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80743
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Reduced source code is
a, b, c;
e(unsigned long f) {
if (!f)
return 0;
if (f <= 3)
return;
if (f <= 6)
return;
if (f <= 32)
return;
if (f <= 64)
return;
if (f <= 128)
re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80600
--- Comment #11 from Krister Walfridsson ---
Author: kristerw
Date: Sun May 14 22:49:03 2017
New Revision: 248037
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248037&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80600 - hidden symbol '__cpu_model' is referenced by D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80744
Bug ID: 80744
Summary: Detect Divide By Zero and give a warning in C/C++
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80745
Bug ID: 80745
Summary: inconsistent warning: large integer implicitly
truncated to unsigned type
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80745
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
The reason for the missing warning is that in the latter two cases the
initializer expression itself wraps around to zero, which isn't diagnosed or
detected, and the initialization then isn't diagnosed.
It se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80746
Bug ID: 80746
Summary: [concepts] ICE evaluating constraints for concepts
with dependent template parameters
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80746
Tom Honermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||67491
--- Comment #1 from Tom Honermann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67147
--- Comment #2 from Tom Honermann ---
The following bug looks likely to be related:
- Bug 80746 - [concepts] ICE evaluating constraints for concepts with dependent
template parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80747
Bug ID: 80747
Summary: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/tailrecursion-4.c fails with ICE when
compiled with options "-fprofile-use
-freorder-blocks-and-partition"
Product: gcc
Ver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80748
Bug ID: 80748
Summary: [concepts] noexcept specifier operands are allowed but
ignored in compound requirements
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80749
Bug ID: 80749
Summary: [concepts] noexcept specifier operands are allowed but
ignored in compound requirements
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80750
Bug ID: 80750
Summary: [concepts] noexcept specifier operands are allowed but
ignored in compound requirements
Product: gcc
Version: c++-concepts
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80748
Tom Honermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80750
--- Comment #1 from Tom Honermann ---
*** Bug 80748 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80750
--- Comment #2 from Tom Honermann ---
*** Bug 80749 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
--- Comment #9 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Still in 7.1.0 and in trunk 8.0.0!
Will it ever be fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410
--- Comment #27 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Still in 7.1.0 and trunk 8.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50402
--- Comment #5 from Vittorio Zecca ---
ICE still in 7.1.0 and trunk 8.0.0
Even if the code is invalid the compiler should not just crash.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67486
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Still in 8.0.0 trunk 247930
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80751
Bug ID: 80751
Summary: NULL pointer dereferencing in gfc_trans_call on
calling elemental procedure (trunk 247930)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
44 matches
Mail list logo
