https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82577
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82549
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 17 07:38:32 2017
New Revision: 253805
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253805&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/82549
* fold-const.c (optimize_bit_fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82569
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
Btw, do the problematic functions have a prototype or are they written in the
old-fashioned K&R way?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82572
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80061
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ekchew at lgl dot kos.net
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82566
--- Comment #3 from Peter Gottschling
---
Ok. Then I give up on 4.9. BTW, I couldn't find a list on the gcc homepage
which release is still supported. There were only dates when it was released
but not when the maintenance was terminated (just a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82344
--- Comment #5 from Yulia Koval ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> So the newton-raphson step causes register pressure to increase and post
> haswell this makes code slower than not using rsqrt (thus using sqrtf and a
> division)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82566
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
The gcc front page: https://gcc.gnu.org
Has
Supported Releases
GCC 7.2 (changes)
Status: 2017-08-14 (regression fixes & docs only).
Serious regressions. All regressions.
GCC 6.4 (changes)
Status: 2017-07-04
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82570
--- Comment #1 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 17 08:38:07 2017
New Revision: 253806
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253806&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-17 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/82570
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82570
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82574
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82578
Bug ID: 82578
Summary: Redundant instructions emitted starting with r204212
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67831
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 17 09:06:53 2017
New Revision: 253807
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253807&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-17 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/67831
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67831
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82578
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Krebbel ---
As expected the rtl dumps are identical up to removed "regmove" pass.
The interesting change is in insn 8. With regmove the value already loaded into
r47 is reused while without regmove it is loaded from a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82478
--- Comment #2 from Corey Tabaka ---
From section 11.3.2 of the C++14 draft spec:
"Declaring a class to be a friend implies that the names of private and
protected members from the class granting friendship can be accessed in the
base-specifiers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82560
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82561
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82567
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Component|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82569
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82576
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
No, I think the public API shouldn't change (we don't want to grow
simple_bitmap_def unnecessarily). Such big sbitmaps do not make sense.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82442
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82556
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82563
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82478
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The template argument list of ::HasPrivate> is
not a base-specifier.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82579
Bug ID: 82579
Summary: GCC 7/8
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80061
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77369
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2017-04-24 00:00:00 |2017-10-17
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82578
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Krebbel ---
I was wondering why CSE doesn't do the right thing here. In fact it would if it
would not consider our access registers to be particularly cheap.
Access registers are fixed hard regs. Hence, cse considers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82579
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is not a GCC bug, because it's the required behaviour for C++17.
Use -fno-new-ttp-matching to disable it in C++17 (or use -fnew-ttp-matching to
enable it in C++14 and make it ambiguous).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82579
Viktor Ostashevskyi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82579
Viktor Ostashevskyi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82580
Bug ID: 82580
Summary: Optimize comparisons for __int128 on x86-64
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82563
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 17 13:17:30 2017
New Revision: 253809
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253809&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-17 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/82563
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71026
--- Comment #7 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Oct 17 13:22:48 2017
New Revision: 253812
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253812&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Factor out division by squares and remove division around comparisons (0/2)
Commi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82573
--- Comment #2 from Jerry Hudson ---
I was confused by what you meant by "classpath." The
earlier revision by Andrew Pinski better describes the
problem, but I don't recall seeing that option on the form.
Forgive me, this is the first bug report
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82569
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
extern void gl_write_texture_span( GLcontext *ctx,
GLuint n, GLint x, GLint y, GLdepth z[],
GLfloat s[], GLfloat t[], GLfloat u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82577
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80295
--- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 17 14:16:35 2017
New Revision: 253814
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253814&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
2017-10-17 Qing Zhao
Wilco Dijkst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80295
--- Comment #12 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 17 14:17:17 2017
New Revision: 253815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
2017-10-17 Qing Zhao
Wilco Dijkst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80295
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 Regression] ICE in |[7 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77369
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82549
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 17 14:47:15 2017
New Revision: 253816
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253816&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/82549
* fold-const.c (optimize_bit_fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82546
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Tue Oct 17 14:49:05 2017
New Revision: 253817
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253817&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PATCH PR/82546] tree node size
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82549
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 17 14:53:13 2017
New Revision: 253818
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253818&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/82549
* fold-const.c (optimize_bit_fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82581
Bug ID: 82581
Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on writing past the end of a
member array
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80907
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82286
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63477
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63441
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82549
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82577
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Tue Oct 17 15:42:19 2017
New Revision: 253819
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253819&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PATCH, middle-end/82577] Fix DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME ICE
https://gcc.gnu.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82577
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82560
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Tue Oct 17 15:52:21 2017
New Revision: 253820
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253820&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[C++ PATCH 82560] missing dtor call
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82560
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82582
Bug ID: 82582
Summary: not quite optimal code for -2*x*y - 3*z: could use one
less LEA for smaller code without increasing critical
path latency for any input
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82583
Bug ID: 82583
Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on out-of-bounds inner indices
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47418
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 47418, which changed state.
Bug 47418 Summary: warning: array subscript is above array bounds at O2 with
sin6_addr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47418
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 45180, which changed state.
Bug 45180 Summary: bogus warning: array subscript is above array bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45180
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45180
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82584
Bug ID: 82584
Summary: div by zero in random distribution
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38480
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 38480, which changed state.
Bug 38480 Summary: bogus warning with -O3 -Wall: "array subscript is above
array bounds"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38480
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52504
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82584
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell ---
The make_unique bit's irrelevant:
std::discrete_distribution X (weights.begin(), weights.end());
is sufficient.
Reading 29.6.8.6.1 suggests the code is well formed, but all (two) probabilites
are zero
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82556
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Confirmed on the branch (for the unreduced testcase). GCC 7.2 works.
>
> Probably Jakubs pattern changes.
It is an unusual pattern for LRA. I guess it sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82550
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> Confirmed from 6.4 up to trunk (8.0).
Adding a reference to 'p' in 'foo' clears the problem.
module subroutine foo(fun_ptr)
procedure(p), pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82546
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82585
Bug ID: 82585
Summary: missing -Warray-bounds calling strlen on a member at
out-of-bounds offfset
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82560
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Fixed on gcc-7 branch r253822.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82560
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Tue Oct 17 17:27:11 2017
New Revision: 253822
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253822&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[C++ PATCH 82560] missing dtor call
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82586
Bug ID: 82586
Summary: ICE: write_symbol(): bad module symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82586
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
Other invalid snippets :
$ cat z2.f90
program p
type t(a
integer, kind :: a
real(a) :: x
end type
end
$ cat z3.f90
program p
type t(a, a)
integer, kind :: a
integer, len :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82586
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81404
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg01083.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82587
Bug ID: 82587
Summary: ICE in get_pdt_constructor, at fortran/resolve.c:1185
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82588
Bug ID: 82588
Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on a excessively large index
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82588
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82589
Bug ID: 82589
Summary: ICE in gfc_get_pdt_instance, at fortran/decl.c:3278
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82589
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
These variants are processed without any complaints :
$ cat z2.f90
module m
type t(a)
integer, len, private :: a
end type
end
program p
use m
type(t(:)), allocatable :: x
print *, x
end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82542
--- Comment #9 from Ben Longbons ---
The ones I've filed are: #54533, #58150, #80466
But there are quite a few more at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&component=debug&list_id=190134&product=gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82554
--- Comment #3 from Ben Longbons ---
There is DR2524 for the [0, 1) case. Otherwise, filing bugs there looks really
complicated.
I've given you a reproducer. That's as much as I'm capable of.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82586
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82590
Bug ID: 82590
Summary: auto-host.h error: declaration does not declare
anything
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82591
Bug ID: 82591
Summary: [8 Regression] [graphite] Compile-time hog w/ -O2
-floop-nest-optimize
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64611
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82569
--- Comment #5 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 42385
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42385&action=edit
test case that shows the problem
This is a cut down single function test case that shows the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65970
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|jason at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67735
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70377
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70377
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82478
--- Comment #4 from Corey Tabaka ---
Ah, you are right. Late night mixup...
The outer class friend should work though, correct?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71251
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini ---
Related to PR71220.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71368
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71368
--- Comment #1 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 17 19:36:49 2017
New Revision: 253826
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253826&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-17 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/71368
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71821
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 17 19:49:06 2017
New Revision: 253828
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253828&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-17 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/71821
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71821
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58601
Bug 58601 depends on bug 71821, which changed state.
Bug 71821 Summary: [6/7/8 regression] ICE on invalid C++11 code (incorrect
argument for alignas): unexpected expression ‘f’ of kind template_id_expr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82592
Bug ID: 82592
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in extract_constrain_insn, at
recog.c:2207 (error: insn does not satisfy its
constraints)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
