https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84694
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84694
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84694
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84702
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84702
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84703
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84703
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Appeared with r191290.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84704
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84704
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84691
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84705
Bug ID: 84705
Summary: internal compiler error: in add_stmt, at
cp/semantics.c:390
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84691
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
--- Comment #2 from Marek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84675
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84670
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-reduction
--- Comment #7 from Ric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84706
Bug ID: 84706
Summary: Ada bootstrap fails on s390x since r258124
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-reduction
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
Summary|[8 regressi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84705
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Martins testcase is fixed by the first fix for PR84670, the original
> testcase of this PR is not. Would be nice to reduce it further so it can be
> included in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
>
> --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84707
Bug ID: 84707
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
(tree_check()/duplicate_decls())
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84486
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Created attachment 43540 [details]
> candidate patch
>
> Can you check whether this patch works for you (on the unreduced testcase
> which likely exists)?
Ye
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5)
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84705
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r188473 or r188474.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84707
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84707
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84706
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84707
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r253489. Before that:
error: ‘namespace _GLOBAL__N_1 { }’ conflicts with a previous declaration
namespace {}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84704
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84704
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ugh, this one is really nasty.
If a statement-expression has side-effects, like for:
a[({ i++; 0; })] %= 5;
the FE wraps the statement expression with a SAVE_EXPR:
# DEBUG BEGIN STMT;
<;
# DEBUG BEGIN S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > If ICF needs to adjust all points-to if it makes any variable aliases,
> > perhaps it should as well adjust the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84651
--- Comment #2 from Vegard Nossum ---
Related test case/crash:
void a() {
struct {
void b(float) struct b = 0;
void b();
} x;
}
int b;
Gives:
xgcc -x c++ -S -
: In function 'void a()':
:3:17: error: expected ';' at end of member
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
So you can loses the TREE_ADDRESSABLE restriction somewhat in requiring at most
one decl to be TREE_ADDRESSABLE - that's the one you need to keep, the others
may become aliases. Given TREE_ADDRESSABLE isn'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84704
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Testcase without division by zero:
int a[1] = { 0 };
void
foo ()
{
a[({ 0; })] %= 5;
}
--- gcc/tree.c.jj 2018-02-22 12:37:02.634387690 +0100
+++ gcc/tree.c 2018-03-05 10:50:54.37537 +0100
@@ -4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #29 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
>
> --- Comment #28 from Aldy Hernandez ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|amker at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sat, 3 Mar 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
>
> --- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> So given below dump before sccp:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|amker at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82022
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Mar 5 10:19:11 2018
New Revision: 258241
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258241&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-05 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/82022
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84708
Bug ID: 84708
Summary: internal compiler error: in lambda_expr_this_capture,
at cp/lambda.c:772
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82022
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 82022, which changed state.
Bug 82022 Summary: constexpr lambda in template context: expression ‘’
is not a constant expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82022
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84701
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #4)
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
> >
> > --- Comment #3 from amker at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
--- Comment #38 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #37)
> > Dominique - please update with the current status after you manage
> > to do another regular bootstrap/test cycle. Extra issues that crop
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67608
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60230
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linesprower at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84681
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
>
> --- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84684
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Confirmed, valgrind shows a lot of errors like this:
Use --enable-valgrind-annotations, the sparseset errors are spurious.
> ==13397== Conditional jump or mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84685
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84686
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84691
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84687
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This seems to be a general match.pd issue.
We have:
vect_patt_27.7_52 = exp.simdclone.0 (vect_patt_6.6_50);
vect_patt_27.7_53 = exp.simdclone.0 (vect_patt_6.6_51);
vect__26.9_57 = exp.simdclone.0 (vect_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6)
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
> >
> > --- Comment #5 from amker at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84667
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84695
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84689
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80245
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81976
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed by r257745
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84615
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The following test (reduced from gfortran.dg/pr46588.f90)
function aufun(pm)
character(len = *) pm
character(len = *) aufun
print *, ">", pm, "<"
aufun = 'Oh' // trim(pm)
end function aufu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84709
Bug ID: 84709
Summary: Cannot define method with same name of previously
using declared class
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39030
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84689
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*** Bug 84690 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84690
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35844
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 82195, which changed state.
Bug 82195 Summary: Undemangleable lambda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82195
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82195
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84701
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this should be rejected, just like:
typedef int T;
unsigned T i;
You can combine unsigned with int (or char, or long, or short) to refer to a
type, but not use it to modify an existing type.
You
c-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
--with-ld=/usr/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-258241-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-aarch64
Thread model: posix
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84694
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84702
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84709
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84697
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84684
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84702
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84704
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84689
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84705
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84711
Bug ID: 84711
Summary: AArch32 big-endian fails when taking subreg of a
vector mode to a scalar mode.
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80245
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84707
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84711
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84670
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84706
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84711
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84670
Bug 84670 depends on bug 84696, which changed state.
Bug 84696 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in compute_antic_aux, at
tree-ssa-pre.c:2148
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84696
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84684
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> the errors go away. Or if I remove int main () { and }, i.e. keep the
> static_asserts at the toplevel, it fails, but in different spots than when
> it is in m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84670
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugzilla.gnu at coelho dot net
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83983
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 5 12:49:07 2018
New Revision: 258242
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258242&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-05 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/84650
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84684
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or also defining another method in union_composition, like:
static constexpr auto make_value_to_char1()
{
constexpr auto N = sizeof...(alphabet_types);
return N;
}
makes it go aw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84712
Bug ID: 84712
Summary: Missed evaluating to constant at tree level
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84707
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
It really seems all we need is
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -1410,7 +1410,9 @@ duplicate_decls (tree newdecl, tree olddecl, bool
newdecl_is_friend)
|| TREE_TYPE (olddecl) == error_mark_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84713
Bug ID: 84713
Summary: ANY_RETURN_P does't check all SIMPLE_RETURNs
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84707
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84684
--- Comment #6 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I use now a more simpler approach for the fold expression [1], but the problem
from this bug ticket still persisted when I used the same kind of assignment:
for (size_t i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84712
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
We unroll quite late (cunroll) and there aren't any passes (like FRE) after
that to do the propagation. Adding #pragma GCC unroll 16 before the loop lets
it optimize.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84670
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 5 13:18:12 2018
New Revision: 258243
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258243&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-05 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/84670
1 - 100 of 238 matches
Mail list logo
