[Bug c++/86818] New: injected-class-name interpreted as type instead of constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86818 Bug ID: 86818 Summary: injected-class-name interpreted as type instead of constructor Product: gcc Version: 7.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug debug/86687] Wrong debug information for string types passed as parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86687 --- Comment #12 from Nikolay Piskun --- Great work, thanks. Will this fix propagate to other branches?

[Bug target/86819] New: Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86819 Bug ID: 86819 Summary: Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: enhancement Pr

[Bug tree-optimization/86749] [9 Regression] Gcc miscompiles at -O3 with sse4 on valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86749 --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Wed Aug 1 14:40:35 2018 New Revision: 263213 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263213&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix over-widening handling of COND_EXPRs (PR 86749) Thi

[Bug debug/86687] Wrong debug information for string types passed as parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86687 --- Comment #13 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Nikolay Piskun from comment #12) > Great work, thanks. Will this fix propagate to other branches? Patch was OK-ed for "trunk and also for branches after a while".

[Bug c++/86818] injected-class-name interpreted as type instead of constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86818 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Status|UNCON

[Bug target/86820] New: [8, regression] gcc-8 miscompiles binutils on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86820 Bug ID: 86820 Summary: [8, regression] gcc-8 miscompiles binutils on m68k Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 URL: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23471 Status: UNCONF

[Bug target/86820] [8, regression] gcc-8 miscompiles binutils on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86820 --- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- Related (invalid) binutils bug report: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23471

[Bug libstdc++/86821] New: std::system_category() should map EDEADLOCK to EDEADLK

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86821 Bug ID: 86821 Summary: std::system_category() should map EDEADLOCK to EDEADLK Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Co

[Bug sanitizer/86759] ThreadSanitizer: unsupported VMA range on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86759 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug target/86820] [8, regression] gcc-8 miscompiles binutils on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86820 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- Does this help ?

[Bug c/86768] gcc wrongly decides that variable is <=1 after "while (x>1 && blah)" construct.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86768 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Yes, the warnings are issued by call expansion. In past reports like this one Jeff has made the argument that warning for such code is appropriate (e.g., pr82103 comment 4) or that it highlights missed optimi

[Bug libstdc++/86822] New: attribute((malloc)) for new(nothrow)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86822 Bug ID: 86822 Summary: attribute((malloc)) for new(nothrow) Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: enhancement Pr

[Bug sanitizer/86759] ThreadSanitizer: unsupported VMA range on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86759 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- We actually also need commit 4b8cb24bb7cf820f095b20edaa5812d4b78189a4 Author: Bill Seurer Date: Tue Nov 28 16:28:54 2017 + [PowerPC][tsan] Update tsan to handle changed memory layouts in newer ke

[Bug c++/86748] Terminates abnormally without error messages

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86748 --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Wed Aug 1 15:29:36 2018 New Revision: 263222 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263222&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix remove_stmt in vectorizable_simd_clone_call (PR 8675

[Bug tree-optimization/86749] [9 Regression] Gcc miscompiles at -O3 with sse4 on valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86749 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolutio

[Bug target/86820] [8, regression] gcc-8 miscompiles binutils on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86820 --- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #2) > Does this help > ? Thanks. Rebuilding gcc-8 with the patch applied now, will report b

[Bug target/86758] [9 Regression] ICE in replace_stmt compiling gcc.target/i386/pr84309.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86758 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolutio

[Bug libstdc++/60555] std::system_category().default_error_condition() doesn't map system errno values to std::generic_category()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60555 --- Comment #12 from Niall Douglas --- Excellent. Thanks guys!

[Bug target/86808] tilegx port needs updating for CVE-2017-5753

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86808 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- Given that both tilegx and tilepro only support *-linux* targets and the Linux kernel has removed support for those architectures, we might consider obsoleting those ports (as previously su

[Bug libstdc++/86822] attribute((malloc)) for new(nothrow)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86822 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/85075] powerpc: ICE in iszero testcase

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85075 Rajalakshmi S changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED --- Comment #6 from Rajalakshmi

[Bug fortran/86472] allocatable array, bound-procedure, submodule

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86472 --- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas --- Having now checked the standard, I have come to the belief that your expectation that 't' will be associated in the procedure 'myfunc1' is incorrect. F2008 12.4.3.2 note 6 says: "An interface body specifies al

[Bug target/86753] [9 Regression] gcc.target/aarch64/sve/vcond_[45].c fail after recent combine patch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86753 --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Wed Aug 1 16:00:05 2018 New Revision: 263227 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263227&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [AArch64] XFAIL sve/vcond_[45].c tests See PR 86753 for

[Bug target/86774] Alpha port needs updating for CVE-2017-5753

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86774 Richard Henderson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/86819] Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86819 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug sanitizer/86759] ThreadSanitizer: unsupported VMA range on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86759 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Wed Aug 1 17:17:29 2018 New Revision: 263229 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263229&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Cherry-pick compiler-rt revision 318044 and 319180. [PowerPC][tsan

[Bug target/86819] Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86819 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse --- There are 2 independent things. TARGET_MIN_DIVISIONS_FOR_RECIP_MUL controls replacing several divisions with the same divisor (a/x, b/x, c/x) with one division (y=1/x) and several multiplications (a*y, b*y, c*

[Bug target/86786] ia64 port needs updating for CVE-2017-5753

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86786 --- Comment #1 from Jim Wilson --- I no longer have access to ia64 hardware, and don't plan to do anything about this.

[Bug tree-optimization/86506] [9 Regression] tree-vect-patterns.c:225: shift too large for type ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86506 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolutio

[Bug testsuite/86405] UNRESOLVED bb-slp-over-widen-1.c and -2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86405 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolutio

[Bug target/86819] Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86819 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov --- Right, sorry, somehow I imagined the hook has to do with instructions for computing approximate inverse. Indeed the two aspects are independent. I think there may be realistic situations where the change

[Bug libstdc++/86822] attribute((malloc)) for new(nothrow)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86822 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Related to also PR 23383 .

[Bug middle-end/86815] [8 regression] ICE on valid code on armhf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86815 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Target|

[Bug target/86820] [8 regression] gcc-8 miscompiles binutils on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86820 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.3 Summary|[8, regression] g

[Bug c++/23383] builtin array operator new is not marked with malloc attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23383 --- Comment #27 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #0) > the return is not turned into 1 It is now. I didn't check since when.

[Bug target/86802] riscv port needs updating for CVE-2017-5753

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86802 Jim Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/86759] ThreadSanitizer: unsupported VMA range on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86759 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Aug 1 18:17:29 2018 New Revision: 263231 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263231&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR sanitizer/86759 * tsan/tsan_platform.h: Cherry-pick com

[Bug sanitizer/86759] ThreadSanitizer: unsupported VMA range on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86759 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/86608] [6/7/8/9 Regression] volatile variable is taken as a constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86608 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Hmm, but I'm not happy about the error it produces, better use non_const_var_error somehow.

[Bug c++/86767] [6/7/8/9 Regression] continue statements in constexpr functions causes unbounded looping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86767 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/86767] [6/7/8/9 Regression] continue statements in constexpr functions causes unbounded looping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86767 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | Status|NEW

[Bug target/86819] Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86819 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #3) > I think there may be realistic situations where the change can introduce a > regression: while a win throughput-wise, it introduces one multiplication > latency

[Bug c++/86823] New: [6/7/8/9 Regression] private member template struct/class is publicly accessible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86823 Bug ID: 86823 Summary: [6/7/8/9 Regression] private member template struct/class is publicly accessible Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug bootstrap/86739] [9 Regression] Bootstrap broken with host GCC 4.1.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86739 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > ISTR figuring the default hash_map<> template resolution is a bit tricky. ISTR thinking it was rather overcomplicated.

[Bug c/80383] wrong caret location and missing detail in warning: initializer element is not a constant expression on a signed overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80383 --- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1) > > I tried testing this but it looks like the -Wshift-overflow=2 option has > broken; I'll have to open a separate bug about that: > > $ /usr/local/bin/gcc -c -O

[Bug c/80619] bad fix-it hint for GCC %lu directive with int argument: %wu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80619 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/80744] Detect Divide By Zero and give a warning in C/C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80744 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/86190] [6/7/8 Regression] -Wsign-conversion ignores explicit conversion in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86190 --- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Wed Aug 1 20:06:54 2018 New Revision: 263237 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263237&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/86190 - bogus -Wsign-conversion warning * typec

[Bug c++/86190] [6/7 Regression] -Wsign-conversion ignores explicit conversion in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86190 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/86819] Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86819 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4) > But unless your FPU can do 2 divisions in parallel, you have to take into > account the delay before a second division can start (related to > throughput), whic

[Bug target/86819] Set min_divisions_for_recip_mul to 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86819 --- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #5) > Note that your code compares throughput. A microbenchmark for comparing > latency would chain dependent computations, e.g. like this: Ok, the 2 divisions manag

[Bug target/86770] UNRESOLVED: 30_threads/call_once/call_once1.cc compilation failed to produce executable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86770 Jim Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ada/86211] GCC 8 ada cannot build GCC 7 ada

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86211 John Marino changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gnugcc at marino dot st --- Comment #4 fro

[Bug fortran/86472] allocatable array, bound-procedure, submodule

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86472 --- Comment #6 from Jim Feng --- 't' is a local variable of myfunc1. If I change to following: Module M1 implicit none type :: mytype contains procedure :: myfu

[Bug tree-optimization/86824] New: [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in replace_stmt, at tree-vectorizer.c:611

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86824 Bug ID: 86824 Summary: [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in replace_stmt, at tree-vectorizer.c:611 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/86448] GCC 9 compiler generates slower code for spec 2006 milc on a power9 using -mcpu=power9 than using -mcpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86448 --- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner --- The options I use for spec are: -O3 -fpeel-loops -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize -fvect-cost-model -msave-toc-indirect -mno-pointers-to-nested-functions -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations -ffast-math -mvec

[Bug tree-optimization/86650] -Warray-bounds missing inlining context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86650 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Wed Aug 1 23:39:35 2018 New Revision: 263239 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263239&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/86650 - -Warray-bounds missing inlining context gcc/

[Bug fortran/80256] Cygwin test fail: bind_c_array_params_2.f90 scan-assembler-times

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80256 nightstrike changed: What|Removed |Added Target|*-*-cygwin |*-*-cygwin *-*-mingw* Status|R

[Bug middle-end/84823] [6 Regression] x86 LRA hang on valid code (no ICE) with -fno-omit-frame-pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84823 --- Comment #4 from A. Wilcox (awilfox) --- Even with -fno-guess-branch-probability (which is what we have put on our x86 builders so they run at all), rrdtool-1.7.0's rrd_resize.c has managed to make the same lock happen yet again. The only opt

[Bug middle-end/84823] [6 Regression] x86 LRA hang on valid code (no ICE) with -fno-omit-frame-pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84823 --- Comment #5 from A. Wilcox (awilfox) --- Created attachment 44483 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44483&action=edit more preprocessed source that fails % gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -DLOCALEDIR=\"/usr/share/locale\" "-DRRD_DE

[Bug tree-optimization/86824] [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in replace_stmt, at tree-vectorizer.c:611

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86824 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdsandiford at googlemail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/86824] [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in replace_stmt, at tree-vectorizer.c:611

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86824 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/86711] [9 Regression] wrong folding of memchr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86711 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED See Also|

[Bug middle-end/86714] tree-ssa-forwprop.c confused by too long initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86714 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug c++/86825] New: g++.old-deja/g++.pt/ptrmem10.C test fails on windows targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86825 Bug ID: 86825 Summary: g++.old-deja/g++.pt/ptrmem10.C test fails on windows targets Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30552 --- Comment #11 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #10) > Author: law > Date: Wed May 2 17:22:26 2018 > New Revision: 259849 > > URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259849&root=gcc&view=rev > Log: > PR c/3055

[Bug target/86820] [8 regression] gcc-8 miscompiles binutils on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86820 --- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- Yes, I can confirm that the patch from comment #2 fixes the problem for me. (sid-m68k-sbuild)root@epyc:/binutils/binutils-gdb# ls -l /tmp/json2yaml -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 43823968 Aug 2 01:53 /

[Bug c++/86826] New: deduction fails on auto-returning function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86826 Bug ID: 86826 Summary: deduction fails on auto-returning function template Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/86714] tree-ssa-forwprop.c confused by too long initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86714 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor -

[Bug middle-end/86711] [9 Regression] wrong folding of memchr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86711 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor -

[Bug tree-optimization/86552] missing warning for reading past the end of non-string arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86552 Bernd Edlinger changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de --- C

[Bug target/86771] [9 Regression] gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_1.f90 fails on arm after combine 2 insns to 2 insns patch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86771 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target Milestone|---

[Bug gcov-profile/86817] [8/9 Regression] Misleading warning in gcov since r254672

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86817 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug c++/70435] section attribute of a function template is not honored.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70435 --- Comment #3 from Matheus Izvekov --- Still an issue in gcc 8.2.0.

<    1   2