https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87693
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87694
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87691
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87695
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87701
Bug ID: 87701
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in elimination_costs_in_insn, at
reload1.c:3640 since r265398
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87701
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2018-10-23
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87698
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #38 from Tamar Christina ---
> Probably not much. So let's go with your kludge from comment #19 but with a
> comment giving the rationale for putting it in.
Thinking about this and what Richard said before, If we go with that appro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86144
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87701
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
--- Comment #1 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87700
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87701
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> x86?
Yes! I forgot to mention that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87700
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.2.0
Target Milestone|9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #39 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Thinking about this and what Richard said before, If we go with that
> approach the Include directories, Library paths etc will all be wrong.
> It'll work but it's going to use a mix of the host and targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85603
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Tue Oct 23 08:27:14 2018
New Revision: 265412
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265412&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/85603
* frontend-passe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87688
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87105
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87693
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87693
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 23 08:51:20 2018
New Revision: 265413
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265413&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87693
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87674
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Dunno if we want to change anything from the above beyond the above patch,
> perhaps the const type * vs. type * differences might be highest on the list
> to chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
>
> Martin Jambor changed:
>
>What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86144
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86144
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 23 08:58:39 2018
New Revision: 265414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/86144
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49574
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
OK here's the documentation patch:
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -3383,6 +3383,11 @@ object to the same type, to a base class of that type,
or to void; such
a conversion function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87692
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this needs to be specified by the ABI before we can change it, and
you'd still you have a backwards compatibility problem. If the function is
inline and included in two translation units, the compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87698
--- Comment #3 from Romain Geissler ---
Well I might not understand everything but no I don't think I am comparing
uncomparable things.
I never build/link with -fno-lto, -flto is *always* provided.
See for example the case with fat objects:
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87699
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87698
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, romain.geissler at amadeus dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87698
>
> --- Comment #3 from Romain Geissler ---
> Well I might not understand ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87674
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:25:57 2018
New Revision: 265416
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265416&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/87674
* config/i386/avx512vlintrin.h (_mm_mask_m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87697
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to jynelson from comment #0)
> Casting a base class to a derived class gives no warning, even with -Wall
> -Werror enabled. I've been told on IRC that this sort of cast is undefined
> behaviour ac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86383
--- Comment #15 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to coypu from comment #14)
> Also, after these two patches, my own build of arm--netbsdelf is failing
> from this:
> configure: error: Pthreads are required to build libgomp
>
> Looking at conf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87700
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:36:13 2018
New Revision: 265418
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265418&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87700
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87700
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:35:31 2018
New Revision: 265417
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265417&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87700
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87688
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
So far I have reached r264892 (PASS), r264901 (FAIL).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84636
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86198
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:59:38 2018
New Revision: 265419
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265419&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87700
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87702
Bug ID: 87702
Summary: [5/6/7/8 Regression] Segfault in glibc if compiled
with -march=amdfam10 -O2 (x86)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86383
--- Comment #16 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Tue Oct 23 10:19:15 2018
New Revision: 265420
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265420&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[arm] Update default CPUs during configure
There are a couple of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87703
Bug ID: 87703
Summary: UBSAN: poly-int.h:1941:12: runtime error: negation of
-9223372036854775808 cannot be represented in type
'long int'; cast to an unsigned type to negate this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87691
--- Comment #7 from Jozef Lawrynowicz ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
>
> I think it's better to, at this place, simply allow MODE_INT or
> MODE_PARTIAL_INT
> for unions. Allowing MODE_INT is what we'd fall back to anyways and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87688
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Eric is right: r264896 (OK), r264897 (FAIL).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87691
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, jozef.l at mittosystems dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87691
>
> --- Comment #7 from Jozef Lawrynowicz ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87702
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
Component|rtl-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87704
Bug ID: 87704
Summary: [6/7/8/9 Regression] unique_ptr(nullptr_t) requires
T to be complete
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-vali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87704
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87704
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
C++17 doesn't have the defect, it appears to have been fixed as an unintended
consequence of https://wg21.link/lwg2801
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87105
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 23 11:34:56 2018
New Revision: 265421
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265421&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87105
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87608
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 23 11:34:56 2018
New Revision: 265421
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265421&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87105
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
On x86_64 it fails with -O1 -fstrict-aliasing -ftree-loop-vectorize
It still fails if every -fno-xxx option for -O1 is added except
-fno-tree-copy-prop so it seems to require:
-fstrict-aliasing -ftree-lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87608
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87105
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
The code is now better but not vectorized due to mentioned issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Correction, on both x86_64 and ppc64le it requires all of:
-fstrict-aliasing -ftree-loop-vectorize -ftree-sra -ftree-ch -ftree-forwprop
-ftree-copy-prop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87705
Bug ID: 87705
Summary: Compilation error when dealing with sub derived types
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87706
Bug ID: 87706
Summary: Inlined functions trigger invalid -Wmissing-profile
warning
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87706
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87705
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
C testcase that is miscompiled:
struct X { long x; long y; };
struct X a[1024], b[1024];
void foo ()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1024; ++i)
{
long tem = a[i].x;
a[i].x = 0;
b[i].x = tem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Known to work|7.3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87704
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 23 13:10:26 2018
New Revision: 265423
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265423&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87704 fix unique_ptr(nullptr_t) constructors
Using a delega
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87665
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c b/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
index 4b3711442e6..a24e1853e03 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
@@ -210,16 +210,26 @@ vect_preserves_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87702
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Please provide the (preferrably small) self contained runtime testcase that
exposes the bug. Some instructions can be found on [1].
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87527
Fergus Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87707
Bug ID: 87707
Summary: actual argument to assumed type dummy argument (i.e.
type(*)) cannot have type-bound procedures
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87708
Bug ID: 87708
Summary: ira-shrinkwrap-prep-[12].c testcases fail after
r265398
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87709
Bug ID: 87709
Summary: c++17 class template argument deduction not working in
a very specific case
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
Secure Messaging Password Notification
This is a password notification message for the Keystone Human Services Secure
Messaging service.
You received this notification for one of the following reasons:
1. You have been sent a secure message.
2. The system administrator has arranged access to t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86687
--- Comment #15 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Oct 23 15:01:12 2018
New Revision: 265426
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265426&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[c++] Fix DECL_BY_REFERENCE of clone parms"
Consider test.C com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86687
--- Comment #16 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Oct 23 15:06:17 2018
New Revision: 265427
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265427&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[c++] Fix DECL_BY_REFERENCE of clone parms"
Consider test.C com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87707
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
Secure Messaging Notification
You have been sent a secure message by Keystone Human Services.
It has been classified as sensitive and may only be accessed from within this
Secure Messaging service.
View the message by clicking here:
https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/P8GbCyPJmPtkM4XTZrW6j
If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87697
--- Comment #2 from jynelson at email dot sc.edu ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> (In reply to jynelson from comment #0)
> > Casting a base class to a derived class gives no warning, even with -Wall
> > -Werror enabled. I've bee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87697
--- Comment #3 from jynelson at email dot sc.edu ---
Created attachment 44884
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44884&action=edit
Casting unrelated types gives an error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87704
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 23 15:29:03 2018
New Revision: 265428
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265428&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87704 fix unique_ptr(nullptr_t) constructors
Using a delega
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87527
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
$ g++ -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS uniform_real.cc
$ ./a.out
a.out: uniform_real.cc:13: int main(): Assertion `x >= low && x < high' failed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87527
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oh sorry, you provided that message yourself. That assertion is there to
enforce the precondition you found.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87710
Bug ID: 87710
Summary: Explicitly mentioned libraries by -lx are not in the
DT_NEEDED list
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87709
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87698
--- Comment #5 from Romain Geissler ---
Reduced test case:
> cat test.c
void f() {}
> cat test2.c
void f();
void g()
{
f();
}
> cat test.ver
{
local: *;
};
> gcc -g -flto -ffat-lto-objects -fPIC -o test.fat-objects.o -c test.c
> gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87698
--- Comment #6 from Romain Geissler ---
Versions of gcc and ld:
> gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 8.2.1 20181011
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86439
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87709
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oops, I missed the first line of the diagnostic. The error from trunk is:
ctad.cc:11:12: error: missing template arguments after 'lit'
11 | auto r2 = (lit(0)) + lit(0);
|^~~
ctad.cc:2:8: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87704
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 23 15:55:05 2018
New Revision: 265429
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265429&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87704 fix unique_ptr(nullptr_t) constructors
Using a delega
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87710
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The linker is part of binutils. not gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87710
--- Comment #2 from Дилян Палаузов ---
I tried this with -fuse-ld=gold and -fuse-ld=bfd .
If you mean the problem is in both ld.bfd and ld.gold, I will report it there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87710
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87710
--- Comment #4 from Дилян Палаузов ---
Moved to
for ld.bfd: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23811
for ld.gold: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23812
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40678
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #4 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40678
--- Comment #5 from G. Steinmetz ---
Following program compiles smoothly and runs ...
Invocations of function h need obligatoric parenthesis, and a dummy.
On the other hand, "implicit none" would force variable h to be
explicitly declared.
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
--- Comment #18 from G. Steinmetz ---
Update and simplified a bit, ICEs down to at least version 5 :
$ cat z1.f90
module m
type t
sequence
real :: a
real :: b = 2.0
end type
type(t) :: z
data z%a /3.0/
end
$ cat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
--- Comment #19 from G. Steinmetz ---
Adding a "parameter" attribute :
$ cat z8.f90
program p
type t
real :: a
real :: b = 2.0
end type
type(t), parameter :: z = t(4.0, 5.0)
data z%a /3.0/
end
$ cat z9.f90
program p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87711
Bug ID: 87711
Summary: ICE in gfc_trans_transfer, at fortran/trans-io.c:2676
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87702
--- Comment #2 from Mihail Zenkov ---
I'm not sure how to reproduce this regressions without rebuilding glibc. But I
can provide prebuilded glibc for test.
http://www.knk.uwebweb.com/glibc-segfault.tar.xz
To reproduce just unpack and run ./test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86687
--- Comment #17 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Oct 23 17:16:55 2018
New Revision: 265431
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265431&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[c++] Fix DECL_BY_REFERENCE of clone parms"
Consider test.C com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86687
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
