[Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678 --- Comment #10 from David Binderman --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9) > C89 6.7p4 looks equivalent to C99 6.9p5, so I don't see why -std=c89 should > imply -fcommon. To reduce costs in upgrading to post-revision 278509 compilers

[Bug c++/92648] Handling of unknown attributes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92648 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/92586] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:13479 with nested allocatable derived types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586 epagone changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||19276 --- Comment #3 from epagone --- Convert

[Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug fortran/92533] [F2018] Permit module names in access-stmt (public::/private::)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus --- Created attachment 47354 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47354&action=edit Parsing-only patch – TODO: resolve PUBLIC/PRIVATE + handle example of comment 1 First patch. Need to resolve us

[Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678 --- Comment #11 from David Brown --- Reliance on -fcommon has not been correct or compatible with any C standard (I don't think it was even right for K&R C). If the code is written correctly (with at most one definition of all externally linked

[Bug middle-end/86172] [meta-bug] issues with -Wnull-dereference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86172 Bug 86172 depends on bug 90264, which changed state. Bug 90264 Summary: [9/10 Regression] -Wnull-dereference QoI issue https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90264 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug tree-optimization/90264] [9/10 Regression] -Wnull-dereference QoI issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90264 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/92646] Compilation fails on armv7l with sys/cdefs.h: No such file or directory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92646 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Looks like multi-arch is not being auto-detected correctly. Try adding --enable-multiarch .

[Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #1 from Andrew P

[Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #14

[Bug rtl-optimization/92665] New: [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665 Bug ID: 92665 Summary: [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/91786] Clang 8.0.1 can't compile the header on Windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91786 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Nov 25 19:01:58 2019 New Revision: 278697 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278697&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/91786 fix compilation error with Clang PR libstdc++

[Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||aarch64-linux-gnu Status|UNC

[Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549 --- Comment #15 from Dávid Bolvanský --- But there is no way to silence this "note".

[Bug ipa/92538] Proposal for IPA init() constant propagation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92538 Erick Ochoa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||erick.ochoa@theobroma-syste

[Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678 --- Comment #12 from Wilco --- (In reply to David Brown from comment #11) > Changing the default to "-fno-common" (and ideally > "-Werror=strict-prototypes -Werror=old-style-declaration > -Werror=missing-parameter-type") would have a lot smaller

[Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 47356 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47356&action=edit Patch which I wrote for GCC 7.3 I have to double check if it applies directly as I had other patches in this ar

[Bug bootstrap/92661] [10 Regression] AIX bootstrap failure with builtin-types.def change

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661 --- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #4) > My suggestion for the target-specific built-in functions would be: > > * builtin_function_type in rs6000-call.c should detect the case of a > DECIMAL_

[Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665 Wilco changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Wil

[Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/92629] internal compiler error: in convert_mpz_to_unsigned, at fortran/simplify.c:173

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92629 --- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: anlauf Date: Mon Nov 25 19:50:38 2019 New Revision: 278699 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278699&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2019-11-25 Harald Anlauf PR fortran/92629

[Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678 --- Comment #13 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #12) > Giving errors on old-style code by default sounds like a good idea. We could > add -std=legacy similar to Fortran to support building old K&R code (and > that would en

[Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- Of course there is, -Wno-misleading-indentation or use line breaks from time to time. With >= 4KB long lines, the user clearly doesn't care about indentation, so the warning doesn't make sense.

[Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #3) > I think it's because many intrinsics in arm_neon.h still use asm which > inhibits most optimizations. NO in this case it is not. Take: #include "arm_neon.h" float64x1_

[Bug libfortran/92569] [8/9 Regression] gfortran read with end directive does not trigger with -ffrontend-optimize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92569 --- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig --- Author: tkoenig Date: Mon Nov 25 20:04:28 2019 New Revision: 278702 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278702&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix EOF handling for arrays. 2019-11-25 Thomas Koenig Haral

[Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549 --- Comment #17 from Dávid Bolvanský --- Check few lines above https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549#c8

[Bug fortran/92533] [F2018] Permit module names in access-stmt (public::/private::)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533 --- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #4) > Probably somewhere in module.c's gfc_use_module. That's actually to early. gfc_use_module is run after all use statements have been processed while the public/pr

[Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2) > This sounds like it could be dangerous from a security context... currently > no network connection is needed to use gcc, it would be a major > disappointment i

[Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug c++/92666] New: bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666 Bug ID: 92666 Summary: bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug c++/92666] bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/92666] [10 Regression] bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|bogus |[10 Regression] bogus |

[Bug rtl-optimization/92656] The zero_extend insn can't be eliminated in the combine pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Severity|n

[Bug rtl-optimization/92656] The zero_extend insn can't be eliminated in the combine pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm, this comes from coremarks (what a bad benchmark).

[Bug debug/92442] Compiling Boost.Spirit.X3 code uses exuberant amount of RAM with -gpubnames

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92442 --- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > There are also quite many _name_ duplicates refering to different DIEs! Like > 178 copies of 'std::is_same_v' and others: std::*_v are variable templates, so t

[Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- True, but I still think the list needs to be compiled in to the binaries statically. If that gave incorrect results in some cases (because a bug was thought to be fixed when the static list was generated, b

[Bug c++/92666] [10 Regression] bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666 --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor --- The check_function_restrict() function is called to do the -Wrestrict checking. It's called conditionally, from check_function_arguments(), when warn_restrict is nonzero. When called, the function calls fold

[Bug c/92667] New: spurious missing sentinel in function call with a local sentinel variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92667 Bug ID: 92667 Summary: spurious missing sentinel in function call with a local sentinel variable Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/92629] internal compiler error: in convert_mpz_to_unsigned, at fortran/simplify.c:173

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92629 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.

[Bug c/92668] New: -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668 Bug ID: 92668 Summary: -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libfortran/92569] [8/9 Regression] gfortran read with end directive does not trigger with -ffrontend-optimize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92569 --- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig --- Author: tkoenig Date: Mon Nov 25 22:26:26 2019 New Revision: 278710 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278710&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix EOF handling for arrays. 2019-11-25 Thomas Koenig Harald An

[Bug libfortran/92569] [8/9 Regression] gfortran read with end directive does not trigger with -ffrontend-optimize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92569 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Summary|-Wtautologi

[Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668 --- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- Isn't this the same as bug 70477?

[Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651 --- Comment #4 from Hongyu Wang --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Btw, which variant is actually the fastest for you? abs expansion doesn't > do any cost comparison but just uses direct abs, max and then the xor with > shift as

[Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651 --- Comment #5 from Hongyu Wang --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > Do you mean r274481 rather than r277481, right? Yes. Thanks for your correction.

[Bug tree-optimization/92649] dead store elimination

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92649 --- Comment #5 from Jiangning Liu --- Unrolling 1024 iterations would increase code size a lot, so usually we don't do that. 1024 is only an example. Without knowing we could eliminate most of them, we don't really want to do loop unrolling, I gu

[Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/70477] -Wtautological-compare too aggressive?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70477 --- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager --- *** Bug 92668 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c/92667] spurious missing sentinel in function call with a local sentinel variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92667 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug debug/46558] dbgcnt.c messages not marked for translation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46558 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/61414] enum class bitfield size-checking needs a separate warning flag controlling it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61414 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-

[Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663 --- Comment #6 from fiesh at zefix dot tv --- My suggestion would be to uniformly include the information about whether a bug has been closed, irrespective of its nature. So yes, un-optimal code generation might also be listed, and I think the us

[Bug rtl-optimization/92657] High stack usage due ftree-ch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92657 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|

<    1   2