[Bug c++/64095] [C++14] Ellipsis at end of generic lambda parameter-declaration-clause should be parsed as a parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64095 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot com --- C

[Bug c++/54367] [meta-bug] lambda expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367 Bug 54367 depends on bug 71332, which changed state. Bug 71332 Summary: Passing non-copyable type by reference to variadic generic lambda after a copyable type by value results in a compile-time error https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=

[Bug c++/71332] Passing non-copyable type by reference to variadic generic lambda after a copyable type by value results in a compile-time error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71332 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/71564] label inside a lambda conflicts (?) with another one outside it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71564 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/61358] Bogus "duplicate label" error after label used within C++11 lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61358 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lh_mouse at 126 dot com --- Comment #2 f

[Bug c++/54367] [meta-bug] lambda expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367 Bug 54367 depends on bug 71564, which changed state. Bug 71564 Summary: label inside a lambda conflicts (?) with another one outside it https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71564 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/84660] Combine doing wrong optimization for 64 bits with SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84660 --- Comment #3 from Jim Wilson --- I screwed up the logic and need to redo the patch. The basic idea is sound though.

[Bug fortran/66128] ICE for some intrinsics with zero sized array parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66128 --- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Patch submitted. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2018-03/msg00010.html This fixes additional failures not included in Gerhard's testcases.

[Bug middle-end/81657] [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/20050503-1.c scan-assembler-not call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81657 --- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #20) > Ok, so the PR is still marked as P1, so we should probably focus on it. > If I'm reading the discussion correctly, there's no consensus about what to > do? Please add

[Bug c++/54367] [meta-bug] lambda expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367 Bug 54367 depends on bug 56973, which changed state. Bug 56973 Summary: [DR 696] crash when capturing variables in nested lambdas https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56973 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/56973] [DR 696] crash when capturing variables in nested lambdas

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56973 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/54367] [meta-bug] lambda expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367 Bug 54367 depends on bug 53157, which changed state. Bug 53157 Summary: within lambda, error: lvalue required as unary ‘&’ operand https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53157 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/53157] within lambda, error: lvalue required as unary ‘&’ operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53157 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/84685] New: Designated initializers warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84685 Bug ID: 84685 Summary: Designated initializers warning Product: gcc Version: 6.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assig

<    1   2   3