https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90776
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90786
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90774
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Shawn Landden from comment #3)
> -fwrapv is completely legal even if it is not passed, and generally I think
> this optimization (if applicable) would outweigh some UB optimizations.
There was thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90786
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90784
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90784
--- Comment #2 from ensadc at mailnesia dot com ---
But curiously, gcc does replace the loop with the constant if `#undef
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_BUILTIN_IS_CONSTANT_EVALUATED` is added before `#include
`: https://godbolt.org/z/mVdLVP . (Why) is
`__builtin_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90786
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Compiles here with version 5.5 and 6.5
Confirmed for 6.5 but
% gfortran-fsf-5 pr86242.f90
pr86242.f90:29:0:
end module test
1
internal compiler error: Segmentation fault: 11
I also get an ICE w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62055
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Created attachment 46464
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46464&action=edit
for vectors
A naive try to handle it for vectors (because it seems a bit easier), copying
the existing pattern fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90786
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72845
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Sat Jun 8 12:51:07 2019
New Revision: 272078
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272078&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/72845
* g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept41.C: New test.
Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72845
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77548
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Sat Jun 8 13:13:48 2019
New Revision: 272079
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272079&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77548
* g++.dg/other/pr77548.C: New test.
Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77548
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52094
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90744
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Jun 8 13:50:42 2019
New Revision: 272082
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272082&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-08 Thomas Koenig
Tomáš Trnka
PR fortran/90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52269
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90608
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #4)
> LTO'ing libgfortran aside, how much work would it be to teach the scalarizer
> to at least elide the temporary arrays in expressions like:
> A(:) = minloc(...) ?
> I t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52269
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Sat Jun 8 14:10:42 2019
New Revision: 272083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272083&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/52269
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-decltype4.C: New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52269
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52464
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90784
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90747
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Possibly the same problem as in PR54080.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54080
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55580
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56189
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56260
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56723
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
#1 from Marek Polacek ---
Still the same with gcc version 10.0.0 20190608 (experimental) (GCC).
||2019-06-08
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed with gcc version 10.0.0 20190608 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59005
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59403
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59131
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59085
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60335
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54080
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
I should spend again some time on this. I must say, my old idea still makes
sense to me, at some point I will probably refresh it, rebase the patch and
send it again to the mailing list: I don't think the act
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60615
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90786
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jun 8 15:52:38 2019
New Revision: 272084
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272084&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-08 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/90786
* trans-expr.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60366
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65175
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65707
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Still ICEs with gcc version 10.0.0 20190608 (experimental) (GCC)
$ xg++ -c 65707.C
65707.C:16:17: internal compiler error: in unify, at cp/pt.c:22784
16 | template struct f
#3 from Marek Polacek ---
Still ICEs with gcc version 10.0.0 20190608 (experimental) (GCC)
#3 from Marek Polacek ---
Still ICEs with gcc version 10.0.0 20190608 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66268
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62041
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|tree-optimization
--- Comment #5 from Marc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90787
Bug ID: 90787
Summary: filesystem tests fail if file permissions are not
supported
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
ead model: posix
gcc version 10.0.0 20190608 (experimental) (GCC)
The ICE only occurs if there are two subroutines each with an "allocate(a)"
statement - one such subroutine on its own does not trigger the ICE.
The ICE also goes away if the class(*) pointer is not initialized to null().
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90788
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66256
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90789
Bug ID: 90789
Summary: gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90789
zhonghao at pku dot org.cn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gcc |gcc complains cannot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66999
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66999
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |diagnostic
--- Comment #3 from Marek Pol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90770
--- Comment #5 from Tadeus Prastowo ---
Created attachment 46466
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46466&action=edit
Complete terminal output during the non-parallel build after applying the
patchset
I confirm that your patchs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67533
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67533
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69060
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69309
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78645
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79308
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90790
Bug ID: 90790
Summary: Using override on a private overridden destructor
shall produce an error
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90791
Bug ID: 90791
Summary: -Os accepts wrong code
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90791
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |inline-asm
Summary|-Os accept
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90792
Bug ID: 90792
Summary: incorrect mangling for beginning
with an
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90792
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is a dup of this bug already and there is also a defect filed with the
abi about this case too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41647
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||grosser at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90793
Bug ID: 90793
Summary: adding -fPIC leads to compilation error
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90794
Bug ID: 90794
Summary: adding -O3 leads to crash
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90793
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90794
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90792
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to the upstream ABI issue:
https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/38
related to PR 88413 and PR 89818 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90790
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90795
Bug ID: 90795
Summary: ICE on compilation when using flas "-fcheck=bounds" in
submodules structure
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
73 matches
Mail list logo