https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242
Paul Hua changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul.hua.gm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56682
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe for leak, not sure about that. For UBSan I think it isn't needed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88333
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 5 08:26:06 2018
New Revision: 266817
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266817&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/88333
* cfgexpand.c (expand_stack_vars): If a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88092
emmanuel.le-tr...@cnrs-orleans.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||emmanuel.le-trong@cnrs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88333
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87897
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 5 08:43:12 2018
New Revision: 266818
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266818&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87897
* g++.dg/init/const13.C: New test.
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85569
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87897
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85569
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88092
--- Comment #4 from Hana Dusíková ---
(In reply to Emmanuel Le Trong from comment #3)
> I have a problem with this. AFAIK, nowhere in the standard is written that a
> class template without argument (i.e. not a type!) can be used as the type
> of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88092
--- Comment #5 from Hana Dusíková ---
So minimal example is:
template
struct S {
constexpr S(...) { }
};
template S(T) -> S;
template struct foo { };
template
void fn ()
{
auto t = s;
foo f1;
foo f2;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88343
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
I've been trying the following;
There were two bugs;
1) the test for Darwin's pic reg needs to be in the save_reg_p () func for
other callers.
2) the bit of code in the #ifdef was essentially doing nothing in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase:
module pr88304
implicit none
type t
integer :: b = -1
end type t
contains
subroutine f1 (x)
integer (kind = 4), intent(out) :: x
x = 5
end subroutine f1
subroutine f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88356
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88361
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88362
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88363
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'll fix the tree-nested.c issue, but I'm wondering about the clobber. E.g.
for
module pr88304
implicit none
type t
integer :: b = -1
integer :: c = 2
end type t
contains
subroutine f1 (x)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And lastly, what tree-nested.c does in cases which don't really fail is pretty
weird:
module pr88304
implicit none
contains
subroutine f1 (x)
integer, intent(out) :: x
x = 5
end subroutine f1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
>
> --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> And lastly, what tree-nested.c does in case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
>
> --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, jakub at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87288
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
I'm doing the backport now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86637
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha ---
Created attachment 45157
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45157&action=edit
Testcase #5
% x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc-9.0.0-alpha20181202 -mavx2 -O2
-fsave-optimization-record -ftree-paralle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45158
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45158&action=edit
gcc9-pr88304.patch
Untested fix for the tree-nested.c bug, handles it like we handle it in
convert_local_refer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88364
Bug ID: 88364
Summary: [9 Regression] Wrong-code due to CLOBBER
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88364
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41453
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88365
Bug ID: 88365
Summary: -Wsign-conversion ignores implicit conversion
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87360
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 5 11:05:59 2018
New Revision: 266820
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266820&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/87360
* gimple-loop-jam.c (tree_loop_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88366
Bug ID: 88366
Summary: ubsan build of d
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: d
Assignee: ibuclaw at g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87360
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Summary|[8/9 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88362
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88364
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87814
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86637
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
I think the issue is we use vect_location via DUMP_VECT_SCOPE before we
set it, thus using an old location in a function where we may have GCed
BLOCKs, etc. The loop vectorization pass resets it via
vect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86637
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86637
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 5 11:36:03 2018
New Revision: 266821
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266821&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-05 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/86637
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88146
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
Bug ID: 88367
Summary: [9 Regression] -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks doesn't
work properly
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86827
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Adjusted testcase that fails also with -m64:
struct A { unsigned char a[84]; };
struct B { unsigned char b[216]; };
struct C { union { struct A c; struct B d; }; };
struct D { unsigned char e[65536]; unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
灿
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87288
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87288
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 5 12:19:32 2018
New Revision: 266822
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266822&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-05 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86827
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Adjusted testcase that fails also with -m64:
> struct A { unsigned char a[84]; };
> struct B { unsigned char b[216]; };
> struct C { union { struct A c; struct B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
--- Comment #3 from Pavel ---
Created attachment 45160
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45160&action=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
--- Comment #4 from Pavel ---
Jonathan, sorry, attached.
Richard,
I forgot to show the structures:
struct kmapset_map {
struct kref kref;
unsignedsize;
struct kmapset_set *set;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87571
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
--- Comment #5 from Pavel ---
Jonathan, sorry, attached.
Richard,
I forgot to show the structures:
struct kmapset_map {
struct kref kref;
unsignedsize;
struct kmapset_set *set;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87048
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86393
MCCCS changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcccs at gmx dot com
--- Comment #5 from MCCCS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88353
MCCCS changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85870
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85870
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Bet the line number is high enough that we jump over some threshold and stop
counting ranges or columns or whatever at that point. David, can you please
have a look?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88368
Bug ID: 88368
Summary: Improper ``use of deleted function''
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88368
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88369
Bug ID: 88369
Summary: [9 regression] g++.dg/vect/pr33426-ivdep.cc etc. FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88369
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88368
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
r209907 is the first one that rejects it this way, before that the preprocessed
source I'm trying doesn't compile because of some __is_trivially_assignable
changes, so it is possible 4.9 accepted this with 4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88370
Bug ID: 88370
Summary: acc_get_cuda_stream/acc_set_cuda_stream:
acc_async_sync, acc_async_noval
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88371
Bug ID: 88371
Summary: Gratuitous (?) warning regarding an implicit
conversion in pointer arithmetic
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88208
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Wed Dec 5 14:16:08 2018
New Revision: 266825
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266825&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Provide SPARCv9 MAXALIGN in gcc.target/sparc/attr-aligned.c (PR
testsuite/88208
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88364
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88368
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, 4.9 accepts it, but so does 5.5 which contains r209907
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88372
Bug ID: 88372
Summary: alloc_size attribute is ignored on function pointers
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88373
Bug ID: 88373
Summary: parse error in template argument list when using
bitwise not with -std=c++2a switch
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88373
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88374
Bug ID: 88374
Summary: crash when stepping into for loop where iterators are
created and compared with gdb
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88373
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
Summary|parse error in te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88368
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63184
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88375
Bug ID: 88375
Summary: Vague source location for bad initialization
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63184
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 5 14:55:59 2018
New Revision: 266827
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266827&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-05 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/63184
* c-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86393
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86637
--- Comment #10 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> Fixed?
Yes, it fixes all three today's testcases, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88064
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Wed Dec 5 15:53:03 2018
New Revision: 266829
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266829&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use unsigned arithmetic for demoted vector plus/minus/mu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88146
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80953
--- Comment #19 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 45163
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45163&action=edit
Preliminary patch for regular sparc output patter test failures
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80953
--- Comment #20 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #18 from Eric Botcazou ---
> (> These are often just off-by-one errors in the line numbers; I believe I
>> have a patch around somewhere to fix at least some of those...
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85726
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80953
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think it is important to find out why there are those differences in line
numbers. Is libbacktrace broken on Solaris, or not used at all, something
different?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
Will Wray changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wjwray at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88369
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45165
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45165&action=edit
gcc9-pr88369.patch
Only those two and not the 4 other ones?
Does the following patch help?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88332
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
"target pdp11*-*-*" is the _comment_ argument to dg-error here as written;
that's why it is displayed in the summary like that, too. I don't see why
it doesn't fail on most systems though, hrm.
FWIW, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
FWIW, clang trunk currently gives the same erroneous suggestion:
:4:19: error: use of undeclared identifier 'aresults'; did you mean
'aresult'?
int aresult = aresults +1;
^~~~
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88362
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
It's not very clear to me what an aligned attribute on a reference, or a
check of the alignment of a reference, should mean anyway.
Note that in some places, [[]]-style attributes appertain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88357
--- Comment #4 from G. Steinmetz ---
Thanks for working on these issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88376
Bug ID: 88376
Summary: ICE in is_illegal_recursion, at fortran/resolve.c:1689
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88377
Bug ID: 88377
Summary: ICE in gfc_omp_clause_copy_ctor, at
fortran/trans-openmp.c:614
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88332
--- Comment #9 from pkoning at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Comment? I thought the comment is the null string after the regexp to match.
Should it read { target { pdp11-*-* } } with the extra braces?
Other examples show up both with the braces and withou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320
--- Comment #9 from Jonny Grant ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #8)
> FWIW, clang trunk currently gives the same erroneous suggestion:
>
> :4:19: error: use of undeclared identifier 'aresults'; did you mean
> 'aresult'?
> int are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88367
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In GCC 8 we had:
else if (code == POINTER_PLUS_EXPR)
{
/* For pointer types, we are really only interested in asserting
whether the expression evaluates to non-NULL. */
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88146
--- Comment #8 from Alexandre Oliva ---
So, no, it's not a copy ctor, but apparently we're reusing the logic that
synthesizes them for other non-default ctors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
It's actually, ipa_polymorphic_call_context::get_dynamic_type that causes
problems here. I'll prepare a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88362
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
I think the attribute on references needs to work the same way as on pointers
so that we get consistent behavior for reference members. __alignof__ should
return the corresponding alignment. For example, in
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
