https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87934
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 19 08:11:40 2018
New Revision: 267253
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267253&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87934
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_constant_expression)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88213
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I'll take it. Patch is testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87934
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88213
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84362
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84362
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> The MEM_REF is in there because we first cre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88547
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88541
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 19 08:31:16 2018
New Revision: 267254
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267254&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/88541
* config/i386/vpclmulqdqintrin.h (_mm256_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88544
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
./arch/arm/include/asm/div64.h:1:0: internal compiler error: Illegal
instruction
also this hints in you using binaries that were compiled for a CPU with an
incompatible ISA.
Note that you might want to ena
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88541
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #19 from Uroš Bizjak ---
FYI, there are quite some sequences like:
kmovw %k1, %r11d
testb %r11b, %r11b
jne .L63
(e.g. when compiling avx512f-pr88464-1.c).
Perhaps ktest insn can be utilized here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #19)
> FYI, there are quite some sequences like:
>
> kmovw %k1, %r11d
> testb %r11b, %r11b
> jne .L63
>
> (e.g. when compiling avx512f-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88548
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #21 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #20)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #19)
> > FYI, there are quite some sequences like:
> >
> > kmovw %k1, %r11d
> > testb %r11b, %r11b
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #22 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> Indeed, -mavx512dq produces expected ktestb. Sorry for the false alarm.
f3 and f4 functions however can use ktestw even without -mavx512dq.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88542
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87881
--- Comment #16 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Hi Jakub,
I don't have access to the source until this evening. You, I think,
must be right. I need to use gfc_replace_expr. I'm trying to do many
things at once - this PR has been on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88540
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #23 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #22)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> > Indeed, -mavx512dq produces expected ktestb. Sorry for the false alarm.
>
> f3 and f4 functions however can use ktes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87881
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The multiple REF_INQUIRY allowed is just whatever%re%kind or whatever%im%kind,
right (because %re/%im must apply to complex and makes a scalar out of it and
%len needs a character type designator)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88540
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88540
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
Looks that AARCH64 is also affected. This is output from gcc 8.2 for SIZE=2:
[asm]
test(double*, double*, double*):
ldp d1, d0, [x0]
ldp d3, d2, [x1]
fcmpe d1, d3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88548
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #24 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #23)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #22)
> > (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> > > Indeed, -mavx512dq produces expected ktestb. Sorry for the false ala
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Isn't ktestw and kortestw the same thing when both operands are the same mask
register?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And the TARGET_AVX512F && looks incorrect, then we wouldn't be able to test or
cmp without -mavx512f.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88541
--- Comment #5 from jbeulich at novell dot com ---
So why -mavx instead of -mavx2? I think the way it was done for GFNI and SSE2
it should also be done there, here and for VAES wrt AVX: Only SSE2 provides
support for vectors of ints. Similarly onl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88541
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Because AVX was what is in i386-builtins.def already and as the testcase shows,
it works with just -mavx. You can not just load/store those vectors, you can
also do logical operations on them etc. (through t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88535
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from john henning ---
>> There are 3 different switches: --build, --host and --target.
>
> Hmm. I must be looking in the wrong place for documentation; are these
> ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #27 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #25)
> Isn't ktestw and kortestw the same thing when both operands are the same
> mask register?
True, but kortestw is available with AVX512F, where ktestw is not.
(In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88464
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #27)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #25)
> > Isn't ktestw and kortestw the same thing when both operands are the same
> > mask register?
> True, but kortestw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84257
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84362
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 45261
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45261&action=edit
patch I am testing
I am testing the attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86487
Oliver Stannard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||oliver.stannard at arm dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88180
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87881
--- Comment #18 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Exactly
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 09:17, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87881
>
> --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> The multipl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85275
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 19 11:10:08 2018
New Revision: 267262
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267262&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-19 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/88533
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88533
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 19 11:10:08 2018
New Revision: 267262
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267262&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-19 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/88533
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28364
--- Comment #35 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 19 11:10:08 2018
New Revision: 267262
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267262&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-19 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/88533
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78394
--- Comment #14 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #12)
> Whether or not to fix as well as whether or not to warn at -O0 are a topic
> of debate. I'm not sure I'm up for re-opening that can of worms right now.
I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88547
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88180
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87814
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88146
Bug 88146 depends on bug 87814, which changed state.
Bug 87814 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15962 with
range-v3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87814
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88533
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88196
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88550
Bug ID: 88550
Summary: A compiler error when use lto: internal compiler
error: in add_symbol_to_partition_1, at
lto/lto-partition.c:155
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88544
--- Comment #3 from Petr Štetiar ---
Hi Richard,
thanks a lot for your fast response!
It's probably my first bug report to GCC so I'll probably need a little
guidance to get you output which might help you.
I can do or enable whatever is neede
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84257
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #5)
> 1) Speculation: that there are a lot of paths to search and they might
> contain many files, so that if there's no caching of the results (perhaps
> that was present
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> > Did this ever get taken to the ABI group?
>
> I've done so now.
I tried to start a discussion at the ia3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88213
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Dec 19 13:54:08 2018
New Revision: 267263
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267263&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Restrict a VSX extract to TARGET_POWERPC64 (PR88213)
This pattern o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80990
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87999
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443
samtebbs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||samtebbs at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88213
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Dec 19 14:02:52 2018
New Revision: 267264
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267264&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2018-12-19 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88213
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Dec 19 14:04:22 2018
New Revision: 267265
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267265&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2018-12-19 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87841
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I've asked the C++ committee to clarify whether the example is bogus or not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #12)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> > > Did this ever get taken to the ABI group?
> >
> > I've done
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65675
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The change in comment 5 was done in r222542
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88213
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I'm subscribed as abusenet at kayari dot org and I'm pretty sure that's the
address I used for both posts, because that's what the Google web UI does
automatically.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14)
> I'm subscribed as abusenet at kayari dot org and I'm pretty sure that's the
> address I used for both posts, because that's what the Google web UI does
> automatica
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86487
--- Comment #7 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
This one sort of fell through the cracks on me. With help from Vlad and Richard
S. I managed to track the issue to uses_hard_regs_p and the way it handles
paradoxical subregs (or fails to). I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87237
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
c.f. Bug 65146
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Submitted, subject "Alignment requirements for _Atomic should be stated"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And the post has appeared now, which didn't happen last time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88551
Bug ID: 88551
Summary: passing a portion of an array of a derived type that
contains an allocatable component
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87841
--- Comment #5 from Ole Kniemeyer ---
Thanks for asking the committee. I think the standard makes sense as it is,
because otherwise there is no chance to name the template parameter (that's
what I need in my specific situation where I found the b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88547
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For 64-byte vectors, we emit
vpcmpgtb%zmm1, %zmm0, %k1
vpxor %xmm1, %xmm1, %xmm1
vpternlogd $0xFF, %zmm0, %zmm0, %zmm0
vmovdqu8%zmm1, %zmm0{%k1}
for f1,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43064
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Dec 19 15:08:21 2018
New Revision: 267272
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267272&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++: more location wrapper nodes (PR c++/43064, PR c++/43486)
This is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43486
--- Comment #15 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Dec 19 15:08:21 2018
New Revision: 267272
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267272&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++: more location wrapper nodes (PR c++/43064, PR c++/43486)
This is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87504
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Dec 19 15:15:42 2018
New Revision: 267273
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267273&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++: improvements to binary operator diagnostics (PR c++/87504)
The C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88375
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Dec 19 15:22:27 2018
New Revision: 267276
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267276&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++: better locations for bogus initializations (PR c++/88375)
PR c++/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43064
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43486
--- Comment #16 from David Malcolm ---
Should be greatly improved for C++ for gcc 9 by r267272.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87504
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
After r267273, g++ emits:
test.cc:10:30: error: invalid operands of types ‘const char [6]’ and ‘const
char’ to binary ‘operator&’
10 | return __builtin_strnlen (a&a[v0], n);
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88375
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43064
--- Comment #12 from Jonny Grant ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #11)
> Should be fixed (for gcc 9) by r267272.
Fantastic David!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86487
--- Comment #8 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Oliver,
Your new example doesn't seem to be hitting the same issue as the first one.
The first failure was being caused by paradoxical subregs, the second one
doesn't have paradoxical subregs.
I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87992
--- Comment #2 from G. Steinmetz ---
It should be valid code, just as legal as
$ cat z3.f90
subroutine s(x)
class(*), allocatable :: x
allocate (x, source='')
end
$ cat z4.f90
subroutine s(x)
class(*), allocatable :: x
allocate (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88552
Bug ID: 88552
Summary: ICE in gfc_typenode_for_spec, at
fortran/trans-types.c:1120
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88552
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
Detected :
$ cat z2.f90
program p
integer(len((c)) :: n
end
$ cat z5.f90
implicit none
integer(len((c)) :: n
end
$ gfortran-9-20181216 -c z2.f90 -fimplicit-none
z2.f90:2:14:
2 | integer(len((c)) ::
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88547
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45264
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45264&action=edit
gcc9-pr88547-1.patch
Untested patch to improve the avx512* sse_movcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88552
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88553
Bug ID: 88553
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name,
have var_decl in SSA_VAL, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:461
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58042
Michael K. changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||test_avto22 at mail dot ru
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87763
samtebbs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||samtebbs at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88554
Bug ID: 88554
Summary: Segfault ICE when falling off the end of a
reference-returning friend operator
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88554
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88554
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Arthur O'Dwyer from comment #0)
> This is happening in trunk but not in GCC 8.2, so it must be a very recent
> regression.
You can't assume that, gcc-8-branch was branched from trunk in April.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80191
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
I think quoting/translating grammar terms is a general problem in the C++
front-end (perhaps to a lesser extent also in the rest of GCC as well). The
inconsistencies it leads to can be seen in the translated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88554
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Started to ICE (rather than give a -Wreturn-type diagnostic) with r263298
>
> Add fix-it hint for missing return statement in assignment operators (PR
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88554
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This fixes the ICE but I don't know if it's right and haven't tested it any
further:
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -16093,7 +16093,7 @@ finish_function (bool inline_p)
tree valtype =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88553
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88554
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oh that's definitely not right, because we don't want a fix-it for friend
functions, where *this isn't valid.
So this seems better:
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -16092,6 +16092,7 @@ finish_f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88553
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88550
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88550
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
Dump file produced by the linker with -fdump-ipa-cgraph --save-temps (it
may end up in /tmp) would help to at least have clue what kind of symbol
caused the crash.
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
+
办理正规普通3%税票，点优惠，包真。
详电：王生
手机：136 6260 7748
业QQ：958811639
++
2:16
杆共贵默
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87504
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88555
Bug ID: 88555
Summary: [9 Regression] Pack expansion fails
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
