https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90330
--- Comment #32 from Iain Sandoe ---
Well it still Works For Me™
If this is still not working for you, I might speculate that something is
corrupted in an install somewhere, perhaps reinstall command line tools /
Xcode?
$ /src-local/gcc-9-branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91426
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91430
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91419
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019, hp at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91419
>
> --- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
>
> (In reply to Richard Biener from commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91432
Bug ID: 91432
Summary: gcc -Wimplicit-fallthrough does not warn when
fallthrough to break;
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91109
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Edlinger ---
I can reproduce with trunk:
arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc -S -O2 -mthumb -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin
20040709-1.c
but not with -O3 -g, neither with gcc-9 and my fix applied.
Nevertheless it is quite obvious th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91432
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
The warning basically says "you may have forgotten 'break;'". If it falls
through to break anyway, what difference does it make if I add a redundant
break?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91414
--- Comment #4 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Tue Aug 13 08:24:43 2019
New Revision: 274361
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274361&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/91414: Improved PRNG
Update the PRNG from xorshift1024* to xosh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91433
Bug ID: 91433
Summary: Performance Regression when upgrading from 8.3.0 to
9.0
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91431
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-reduction
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91414
--- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Tue Aug 13 08:42:43 2019
New Revision: 274362
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274362&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/91414 Improve initialization of PRNG
As part of PR 91414 an imp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91433
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91414
--- Comment #6 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Tue Aug 13 09:00:46 2019
New Revision: 274363
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274363&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/91414 Improve initialization of PRNG
As part of PR 91414 an imp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91414
--- Comment #7 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Tue Aug 13 09:02:25 2019
New Revision: 274364
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274364&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/91414 Correctly fill master_state from os_seed.
Modified:
b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91414
--- Comment #8 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Tue Aug 13 09:04:18 2019
New Revision: 274365
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274365&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/91414 Bugfix for previous commit
Correctly fill master_seed fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91423
--- Comment #5 from Anders Schau Knatten ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Vec size = s.size;
>
> you are invoking the copy constructor here ...
> Which means you are taking the address (implicitly).
Good point.
This should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91434
Bug ID: 91434
Summary: gcc optimization behaviour is inconsistent with -O2
with 4.1.2 and 4.9.4
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91435
Bug ID: 91435
Summary: Better induction variable for vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91435
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #0)
> If we are only ever going to use x+2, why not use that instead, initialize
> with {2,3,4,...}, and skip the +2 at every iteration?
Or since we have another variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91424
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 10:05:44 2019
New Revision: 274369
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274369&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91422
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 10:05:44 2019
New Revision: 274369
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274369&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91424
Bug 91424 depends on bug 91422, which changed state.
Bug 91422 Summary: Illegal Fortran in
testsuite/libgomp.oacc-fortran/routine-7.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91422
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91422
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91424
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91414
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
--- Comment #17 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Aug 13 10:46:44 2019
New Revision: 274376
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274376&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Fix PR81800
PR81800 is about the lrint inline giving spurious FE_INEXA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91436
Bug ID: 91436
Summary: Confusing suggestion to include
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10 regression] on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91437
Bug ID: 91437
Summary: Problem with multi-line test outputs on
x86_64-w64-mingw32
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
The ICE already occurs for
program p
character(:), allocatable :: z(:)
z = z(2)
end
(invalid code, but shorter :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91438
Bug ID: 91438
Summary: [10 Regression] Profiledbootstrap broken on i586 in
Ada
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91438
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2019-8-13
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91434
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91436
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91438
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #1 from Marti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91434
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This code has undefined behaviour:
int main()
{
FSPI pi;
FSPG* pg = new FSPG();
new (&pi.m_a) FSPGI(pg);
pi.m_a.~FSPGI();
return 0;
}
pi.m_a is part of an object on the stack, so its destructor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61071
Johannes Altmanninger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aclopte at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91431
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction |ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91429
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig ---
This
Index: trans-expr.c
===
--- trans-expr.c(Revision 274370)
+++ trans-expr.c(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -10796,7 +10796,13 @@
i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
... and this
Index: trans-expr.c
===
--- trans-expr.c(Revision 274370)
+++ trans-expr.c(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -10796,7 +10796,13 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91439
Bug ID: 91439
Summary: Wrong debug information with -fsanitize=address
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91419
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #3)
> OK, so all testcases in this PR use 'int' which means disabling
> for !natural_alignment_32 would be enough (unless 'int' is not 32bit ;))
I'd assume al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91439
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91435
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61071
--- Comment #5 from Krzysztof Kundzicz ---
(In reply to Johannes Altmanninger from comment #4)
> I can't reproduce this on Arch Linux, perhaps it is fixed by now?
>
> Linux 5.2.2
> gcc 9.1.0
> gdb 8.3
> glibc 2.29
> binutils 2.32
Just increase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91438
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Probably r274238 is fine.
I was wrong, the revision is also affected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90361
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Aug 13 13:14:45 2019
New Revision: 274379
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274379&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/90361 add missing macro definition
The src/c++17/string-ins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61071
Krzysztof Kundzicz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #32739|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90361
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91431
Hyundeok Park changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66970
--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Clang is changing __has_builtin so it recognizes all function-like built-ins,
not just the ones starting with "__builtin_". See
https://reviews.llvm.org/D66100
This means __has_builtin yields true for al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91438
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91426
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
The diagnostic is coming from
gfc_define_st_label in gcc/fortran/symbol.c:2711
2711gfc_error ("Duplicate statement label %d at %L and %L", labelno,
2712 &lp->where, label_locus);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91431
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90473
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Aug 13 15:05:48 2019
New Revision: 274382
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274382&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90473 - wrong code with nullptr in default argument.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 15:08:10 2019
New Revision: 274383
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274383&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/90561
* trans.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90473
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed on trunk, will backport to 9.3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90361
--- Comment #11 from Viktor Ostashevskyi ---
Cool! Thanks a lot, sad that this doesn't make to 9.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91440
Bug ID: 91440
Summary: Precompiled headers regression in 9.2
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80931
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91434
Rajabharathi s changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80619
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Aug 13 15:55:40 2019
New Revision: 274385
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274385&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/80619 - bad fix-it hint for GCC %lu directive with int argument: %wu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80619
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68301
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
This is a duplicate of bug 19808. There's a patch there that I believe
needs just a little more work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91396
--- Comment #5 from ctice at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ctice
Date: Tue Aug 13 16:11:20 2019
New Revision: 274386
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274386&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR other/91396 static linke error with -fvtable-verify
Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91438
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Is this related to PR 91404?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87993
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 13 18:06:08 2019
New Revision: 274388
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274388&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/87993
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87993
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 13 18:27:05 2019
New Revision: 274390
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274390&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/87993
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87994
Bug 87994 depends on bug 87993, which changed state.
Bug 87993 Summary: ICE in gfc_constructor_first, at fortran/constructor.c:234
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87993
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87993
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89647
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 13 18:35:33 2019
New Revision: 274393
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274393&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/89647
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90563
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 18:43:00 2019
New Revision: 274394
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274394&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-08-13 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/90563
* frontend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90563
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 18:49:02 2019
New Revision: 274396
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274396&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-08-13 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/90563
* gfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89647
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 13 18:49:00 2019
New Revision: 274395
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274395&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/89647
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89647
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90361
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, sorry I missed the deadline for 9.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 20:01:43 2019
New Revision: 274398
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274398&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 90561, which changed state.
Bug 90561 Summary: [9/10 Regression] ICE in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at
gimplify.c:2747
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90561
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88072
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 13 20:10:25 2019
New Revision: 274399
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274399&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88072
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88072
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 13 20:13:59 2019
New Revision: 274400
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274400&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88072
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88072
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 13 20:38:01 2019
New Revision: 274401
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274401&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88072
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88072
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91421
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Aug 13 21:35:20 2019
New Revision: 274404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274404&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use checking forms of DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (PR 91421)
We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91421
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Aug 13 21:35:10 2019
New Revision: 274403
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274403&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Protect some checks of DECL_FUNCTION_CODE
This patch pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91421
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90563
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 22:25:32 2019
New Revision: 274405
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274405&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-08-13 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 68301, which changed state.
Bug 68301 Summary: self-dependent reference member initialization not diagnosed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68301
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19808
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68301
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90563
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 13 22:57:31 2019
New Revision: 274406
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274406&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-08-13 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90563
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91347
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91347
--- Comment #3 from John David Anglin ---
I see in dse.c:
/* Get arguments passed to CALL_INSN. Return TRUE if successful.
So far it only handles arguments passed in registers. */
static bool
get_call_args (rtx call_insn, tree fn, rtx *arg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91130
Tom Honermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tom at honermann dot net
--- Comment #46
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88095
Tom Honermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #38 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: luoxhu
Date: Wed Aug 14 02:18:33 2019
New Revision: 274411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274411&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Enable math functions linking with static library for LTO
In
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
