https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85567
Bug ID: 85567
Summary: internal compiler error: in gimplify_modify_expr, at
gimplify.c:5797 when using sincos()
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85566
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85565
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
*** Bug 85566 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85565
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85507
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The ICE is gone if I revert the change in dependency.c from r259385.
This regtests cleanly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85527
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Sun Apr 29 10:26:56 2018
New Revision: 259748
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259748&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[openacc, testsuite] Fix undefined behaviour in atomic_capture-1.c
2018-04
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85429
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
> Should be fixed on tip, requested permission to backport to GCC 8 branch.
It's fixed on sparc, but the Solaris/x86 with as failures remain
(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85527
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
--- Comment #40 from Andrew Haley ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #29)
> Note I repeatedly said this part of the standard is just stupid. It makes
> most if not all type-based alias analysis useless.
I don't think so. It does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85507
--- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> > The ICE is gone if I revert the change in dependency.c from r259385.
>
> This regtests cleanly.
Well, it regtests cleanly, but produces incor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85507
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85569
Bug ID: 85569
Summary: is_invocable(F, decltype(objs)...) fails with "not
supported by dump_expr#" unless via indirection
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85568
Bug ID: 85568
Summary: is_invocable(F, decltype(objs)...) fails with "not
supported by dump_expr#" unless via indirection
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85569
--- Comment #1 from Björn Fahller ---
Created attachment 44038
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44038&action=edit
Test program exposing the bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85569
--- Comment #2 from Björn Fahller ---
Created attachment 44039
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44039&action=edit
Preprocessed version of tests.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85568
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85569
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab ---
*** Bug 85568 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85570
Bug ID: 85570
Summary: Resolution of unqualified-id in member access
involving templates fails
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85571
Bug ID: 85571
Summary: ltobootstrap miscompare with trunk and x86-64
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
--- Comment #41 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On April 29, 2018 1:51:58 PM GMT+02:00, "aph at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
>
>--- Comment #40 from Andrew Haley ---
>(In reply to rguent...@suse.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67225
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tobias.bruell at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67225
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67225
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tcbrindle at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78715
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67225
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Testcase from Bug 78715 comment 0:
template
concept bool Dummy = true;
template
class example {
template U>
friend auto func();
};
class test {
test() = default;
};
int main()
{
test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67225
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||okannen at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80962
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85564
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81523
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alinshans at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85570
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82037
Dennis Clarke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82229
krzysio.kurek at wp dot pl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44025|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85429
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Do you think you could work out a patch that handles the various different
cases?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-*-linux-gnu*|powerpc-*-linux-gnu*,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85562
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, documentation
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
37 matches
Mail list logo
