[Bug middle-end/81908] [8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_auto_array_2.f90 -O3 -g -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81908 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Status|NEW

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/81947] variadic template specialization doesn't compile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81947 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #10 from Matthieu Brucher --- If it is always false, what impeds you for warning as such? Because numerous people are checking this (and I agree that they shouldn't), as proven by my 2 links.

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #11 from Matthieu Brucher --- Oh, and if this is always false, why isn't it the case in debug mode? It is then a bug according to what you said.

[Bug libstdc++/81950] _GLIBCXX17_INLINE macro not used consistently

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81950 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 Matthieu Brucher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug c++/81932] Template arguments of type unsigned generate incorrect debugging information

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81932 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely --- See comment 1.

[Bug c++/60212] no warning for unused variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60212 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Matthieu Brucher from comment #11) > Oh, and if this is always false, why isn't it the case in debug mode? It is > then a bug according to what you said. It is always false in a valid program

[Bug target/72804] Poor code gen with -mvsx-timode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72804 --- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner --- Author: bergner Date: Wed Aug 23 20:03:46 2017 New Revision: 251318 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251318&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/ Backport from mainline 2017-08-17 Peter Bergner

[Bug target/72804] Poor code gen with -mvsx-timode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72804 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED --- Comment #9 from Peter Bergner

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #15 from Matthieu Brucher --- Thanks, finally something relevant, yes it's a bug that can be easilly checked by gcc and that GCC can easilly warn about. (lowering the bar here). Yes, the user should chase the bug because they screwep

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski --- -fsanitize=undefined will catch the NULL pointer at runtime.

[Bug c++/60972] Mixing #pragma pack and __attribute__((packed)) leads to spurious warnings.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60972 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #17 from Matthieu Brucher --- Not everyone runs this sanitizer, and not everyone has unit tests that can find this error (the application I woked on that had this has numerous unit tests, but this was not tested because the guy that w

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #19 from Matthieu Brucher --- That was my original comment... Thanks for quoting me... The issue is that the warning doesn't tell me what you told me, that "this" is never equal to nullptr in that context. This is what the warning sho

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 Matthieu Brucher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|WORKSFORM

[Bug c++/81955] New: corrupted double-linked list (not small)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81955 Bug ID: 81955 Summary: corrupted double-linked list (not small) Product: gcc Version: 6.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/81955] corrupted double-linked list (not small)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81955 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Target|

[Bug c++/81928] if(!this) optimization leads to possible errors without warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928 --- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely --- No, comment 1 was from Richard. And the warning already exists, and it says that a nonnull argument (i.e. something that can never be null) is compared to null. The only thing I'd change would be to change

[Bug c++/78840] [5 Regression] ICE with const variables in templates implicitly captured by nested lambda expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78840 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5/6/7/8 Regression] ICE|[5 Regression] ICE with

[Bug c++/81282] templated Lambda ,auto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81282 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/80969] [8 Regression] ICE in ix86_expand_prologue, at config/i386/i386.c:14606

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80969 --- Comment #5 from dansan at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: dansan Date: Wed Aug 23 21:46:14 2017 New Revision: 251321 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251321&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/80969 - Fix ICE with -mabi=ms -mavx512f, reduce wast

[Bug ada/81956] New: [7 regression] calling a null procedure is not skipped

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81956 Bug ID: 81956 Summary: [7 regression] calling a null procedure is not skipped Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug tree-optimization/81953] Code sinking increases register pressure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81953 --- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool --- It's a good idea to move it to inside the conditional, just not to behind the function call.

[Bug c++/81942] ICE on empty constexpr constructor with C++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81942 TC changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com --- Comment #1 from TC ---

[Bug c++/81957] New: ICE decltype

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81957 Bug ID: 81957 Summary: ICE decltype Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned a

[Bug tree-optimization/81958] New: spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning in gcc-8, or with -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81958 Bug ID: 81958 Summary: spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning in gcc-8, or with -O1 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug target/81797] gcc 7.1.0 fails to build on macOS 10.13 (High Sierra):

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797 --- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth --- (In reply to Romain from comment #6) > Hi, > > > It might be an interesting exercise to encrypt the APFS volume and see if > > that > throws just enough additional filesystem overhead in to make the problem

[Bug target/81959] New: PowerPC __float128 optimization fails with integer PRE_INC addresses

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81959 Bug ID: 81959 Summary: PowerPC __float128 optimization fails with integer PRE_INC addresses Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/81959] PowerPC __float128 optimization fails with integer PRE_INC addresses

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81959 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/81959] PowerPC __float128 optimization fails with integer PRE_INC addresses

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81959 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/81850] [mingw/cygwin] -mabi=sysv ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81850 Daniel Santos changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/57170] No diagnostic for a negative case when switching over unsigned

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57170 TC changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com --- Comment #2 from TC ---

[Bug c++/57170] Diagnostic for a negative case when switching over unsigned comes from -Wsign-conversion instead of -Wpedantic or -Wnarrowing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57170 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid Status|RESOL

[Bug c++/61961] New warning when initializer-list constructor chosen for uniform init that doesn't intend to use initializer_list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61961 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/25814] Request for warning for parser ambiguity of function declarations and variable declarations with initializations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25814 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xinliangli at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/52960] Missing warnings on ambiguous source : function decl vs local var decl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52960 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug c++/81159] New warning idea: -Wself-move

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81159 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/67906] Missing warning about std::move without effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67906 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug libgcc/81960] New: gcc doesn't compile on MAC OS X

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81960 Bug ID: 81960 Summary: gcc doesn't compile on MAC OS X Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc As

<    1   2