[Bug c++/91361] Implement P1152R4: Deprecating some uses of volatile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91361 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Thu Aug 29 03:11:50 2019 New Revision: 275022 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275022&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Implement P1152R4: Deprecating some uses of volatile. P

[Bug c++/91361] Implement P1152R4: Deprecating some uses of volatile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91361 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/88323] implement C++20 language features.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323 Bug 88323 depends on bug 91361, which changed state. Bug 91361 Summary: Implement P1152R4: Deprecating some uses of volatile https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91361 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/91592] `__is_assignable` fails for private assignment operators in certain contexts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91592 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Using std::is_assignable instead works fine.

[Bug target/91594] New: Missing horizontal addition auto-vectorization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91594 Bug ID: 91594 Summary: Missing horizontal addition auto-vectorization Product: gcc Version: 9.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ta

[Bug target/91594] Missing horizontal addition auto-vectorization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91594 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- There was another bug report about this where SLP does not handle reductions but I can't find it right now.

[Bug c/81785] Segmentation fault for signed overflow in index expression when -fwrapv is enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81785 --- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #4) > Looks like removing the optimization regresses c-c++-common/restrict-2.c. Why would it do that? I don't see any code mentioning restrict being touched...

[Bug c/79482] _Static_assert(__builtin_constant_p(x)):

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79482 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug target/91546] Better solution for VEC_INIT under TARGET_SSE4_1 since PINSRB/PINSRD/PINSRQ

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91546 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/91556] Problems with better interface checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91556 --- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #11) > Error: Type mismatch between actual argument at (1) and actual > argument at (2) (REAL(8)/REAL(16)) That sounds _much_ better (and is also shorter). When I am b

[Bug fortran/91556] Problems with better interface checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91556 --- Comment #13 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 05:32:39AM +, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > --- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig --- > (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #11) > > > Error: Type mismatch between actual arg

[Bug d/91595] New: Version (Windows) is not defined in GCC D Compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91595 Bug ID: 91595 Summary: Version (Windows) is not defined in GCC D Compiler Product: gcc Version: 9.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug bootstrap/91580] [10 Regression] i686-{darwin, linux} bootstrap fails after r274926

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91580 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- I'm trying to reproduce that and I'll send diff..

<    1   2