https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92715
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92704
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 29 08:05:03 2019
New Revision: 278828
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278828&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-29 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92704
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92704
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92723
Bug ID: 92723
Summary: ICE in expand_shift_1, at expmed.c:2635
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92654
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #8 from Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92723
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92654
--- Comment #9 from fiesh at zefix dot tv ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> Ok, GCC newly received a support for __has_builtin, so one needs to
> '#define a 0' always.
> The ICE started with r259043, before that the code was rejecte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92717
--- Comment #8 from Markus Dreseler ---
Interesting. Is this implementation documented somewhere?
I can confirm that disabling ASLR results in reproducible gchs:
# setarch $(uname -m) -R /usr/bin/c++ -x c++-header -include test.hxx -o
test.hxx.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92047
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91975
Bug 91975 depends on bug 92047, which changed state.
Bug 92047 Summary: [10 regression] aarch64 regressions after r276645
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92047
What|Removed |Added
--
Hi
Hope you are doing well.
We are following up to if you would be interested in the Attendees/Visitors
List of
The Trophex Show
12 - 13 Jan 2020
NEC, Birmingham, UK
Counts = 7,640
our company provides the following details regarding your attendees: Title,
Client Name, Email and Website, addres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92714
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91574
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Nov 29 09:03:25 2019
New Revision: 278829
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278829&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Check for TYPE_NAME in type_with_linkage_p.
2019-11-29 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92489
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Nov 29 09:07:53 2019
New Revision: 278830
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278830&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/92489
Backport from mainline
2019-07-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92489
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60228
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 29 09:08:46 2019
New Revision: 278831
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278831&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60228
* parser.c (cp_parser_omp_declare_reduction_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60228
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 29 09:10:44 2019
New Revision: 278832
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278832&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60228
* parser.c (cp_parser_omp_declare_reduction_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92715
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
Reduced C++ code:
typedef double a __attribute__((__vector_size__(32)));
double b;
a c;
enum { d, e };
template struct h;
template class i;
template class aa;
template class j;
template class ab;
temp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92715
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92715
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 29 09:18:48 2019
New Revision: 278833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278833&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-29 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92715
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92722
Avi Kivity changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||a...@cloudius-systems.com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92722
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92510
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92705
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|error-recovery |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92685
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92720
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Dennis Clarke from comment #0)
> This may require a bit of a dive into the specifications however
> an inline include of /dev/stdin seems wrong for some definition
> of wrong.
There's no such
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92720
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> GCC does not check the files.
>
> >echo '\042hello botfelk\\n\042'
> This one fails for me too:
> In file included from t8.c:5:0:
> /dev/stdin: In function ‘
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92705
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The ICE is because conv is ck_ambig with user_conv_p set.
Looking at other conv->user_conv_p tests, e.g. reference_binding does:
if (conv->user_conv_p)
{
...
for (conversion *t = conv; t; t = nex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91574
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92719
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-apple-darwin19.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92720
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> (In reply to Dennis Clarke from comment #0)
> > This may require a bit of a dive into the specifications however
> > an inline include of /dev/stdin seems wro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92705
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Though, previously the convert_like calls were done no matter what the
conversion is, so with the above patch maybe after the if (conv->user_conv_p)
... stmts, with whatever the conv is. Not sure if it makes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92724
Bug ID: 92724
Summary: Can't link 9.2.0 ada with latest GCC
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84963
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Nov 29 12:18:50 2019
New Revision: 278836
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278836&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix testcase - was missing -fopenacc
PR ipa/84963
* gfor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91825
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84963
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Nov 29 12:27:34 2019
New Revision: 278838
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278838&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix testcase - was missing -fopenacc
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91997
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The problem is not missing debuginfo, it's a GDB bug:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25234
I have a workaround for libstdc++ though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92725
Bug ID: 92725
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault during GIMPLE pass
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92713
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92724
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91825
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Though, I'm afraid the reduced testcases are bad, because it doesn't reproduce
without the incorrect __trans_tmp_10 that uses int_mode even outside of code
where it is initialized.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92725
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92710
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Nov 29 13:04:56 2019
New Revision: 278839
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278839&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Don't pass booleans as mask types to simd clones (PR 927
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84963
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Nov 29 13:16:31 2019
New Revision: 278840
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278840&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix testcase - was missing -fopenacc
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92726
Bug ID: 92726
Summary: OpenACC: 'NULL'-in -> no-op, and/or 'NULL'-out
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
Bug ID: 92727
Summary: Idea for better error messages
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92476
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Nov 29 13:29:35 2019
New Revision: 278841
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278841&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
ipa-cp: Avoid ICEs when looking at expanded thunks and unoptimized funct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91003
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92476
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Nov 29 13:36:47 2019
New Revision: 278842
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278842&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add an x86_64 test for PR 92476
2019-11-29 Martin Jambor
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92711
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
One particular change that has happened in the GCC 10 devel cycle is that we
started using TOP N counters for indirect calls and value profiling. Right now,
we track 4 key:value pairs for each counter plus one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92476
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91003
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 47396
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47396&action=edit
untested patch
The following fixes the testcase but possibly makes the issue just harder to
trigger.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92711
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
With GCC9 like inliner parameters I get 308MB binary, so it is still
somehwat bigger.
Honza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
--- Comment #13 from Joel Hutton ---
This appears to no longer be failing in the latest 'gcc-testresults' can this
be closed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92711
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> With GCC9 like inliner parameters I get 308MB binary, so it is still
> somehwat bigger.
>
> Honza
I would try to set:
#define GCOV_TOPN_VALUES 1
then you should se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Before the first revision mentioned above *.optimized dump contained just t *
v, the second one doesn't change anything in *.optimized and is a RTL costing
matter.
_4 = (unsigned int) t_1(D);
_10 = _4 + 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 29 Nov 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
>
> --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Before the first revision mentioned above *.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92728
Bug ID: 92728
Summary: [OpenMP][OpenACC] Common-block name clause matching
issues: common block needs to be defined before +
blank common not supported
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79592
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|accepts-invalid |
Last reconfirmed|2017-08-21 00:00:0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92697
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
a*x+x -> (a+1)*x is unsafe (a=INT_MAX, x=0), but there are cases where we could
prove that it is safe, in particular when a is actually b-1 (more generally for
a*x+b*x when we can prove (with VRP?) that a+b can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79592
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #0)
> If the expression is (void*)1 rather than (void*)1LL then it is incorrectly
> accepted.
And that was the same problem, fixed by r257161.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
At least from the comments it seems fold_plusminus_mult_expr only handles
(A * C) +- (B * C) -> (A +- B) * C
(A * C) +- A -> A * (C +- 1)
so for the testcases in question that is the latter and we p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92510
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
Bug ID: 92729
Summary: [avr] Convert the backend to MODE_CC so it can be kept
in future releases
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Are you suggesting that everything inside libstdc++ code should be treated as a
black box for the purposes of diagnostics, so that the location of the actual
problem:
error: use of deleted function ‘X::X(c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89280
--- Comment #15 from Martin Liška ---
*** Bug 92725 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92725
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92379
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Any update about this Segher?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91997
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Nov 29 14:47:03 2019
New Revision: 278846
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278846&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++:: improve how pretty printers find node types (PR 91997)
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92710
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Nov 29 14:47:44 2019
New Revision: 278851
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278851&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Don't defer choice of vector type for bools (PR 92596)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
--- Comment #11 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Nov 29 14:47:44 2019
New Revision: 278851
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278851&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Don't defer choice of vector type for bools (PR 92596)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
The first question could be why SCCP produces
(const int) ((unsigned int) t_2(D) + 4294967295) * v_3(D) + v_3(D)
and not directly t*v. Several loop passes do have this tendency to split out
the last (or first)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92677
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Nov 29 14:48:30 2019
New Revision: 278852
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278852&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix DR_GROUP_GAP for strided accesses (PR 92677)
When d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92379
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It's not top priority; it is fine for stage 4, too. Patches welcome.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> The suggestion I'll try to work on is to check if C isn't a plus/minus expr
> with constant second operand that doesn't go in the other direction and thus
> where t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91997
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.0|8.4
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On November 29, 2019 3:25:45 PM GMT+01:00, "glisse at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
>
>--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
>a*x+x -> (a+1)*x is unsaf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> > The suggestion I'll try to work on is to check if C isn't a plus/minus expr
> > with constant second operand that d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92286
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92283
--- Comment #26 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I think I find the problem root. We have
** Local #2: **
Choosing alt 0 in insn 1804: (0) =v (1) %0 (2) vm (3) v
{*fma_fmadd_df}
Creating newreg=4707 from oldreg=1801,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92710
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] |[9 Regression] Vectoriser
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92677
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
--- Comment #3 from David Brown ---
I may not have been very clear here. Let me try and take a step back here.
>From the user's viewpoint, the problem is that they have made a class that
can't be copied, and they have written code that tries to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> I know, it will be a small complication, sure, but it can be handled.
Ah, I think I understand now. But still
x=-1
a=INT_MAX
a*x+x gives INT_MIN without overflo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #3)
> Perhaps this could be better handled using concepts?
Yes, ideally. That stops compilation as soon as you try to call something that
fails to satisfy the constrai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The downside of this (and your suggestion to remove push_back from the overload
set) is that you no longer get told the copy constructor is deleted and why.
That note is only printed when the copy construct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > I know, it will be a small complication, sure, but it can be handled.
>
> Ah, I think I understand now. But stil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92193
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
--- Comment #6 from David Brown ---
I can see it is a challenge to get enough detail in the messages to be good for
the more advanced users, and still simple enough and clear enough for more
casual or inexperienced users.
The static assertion lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92730
Bug ID: 92730
Summary: [OpenMP] Common blocks in map() clause not accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #6)
> I can see it is a challenge to get enough detail in the messages to be good
> for the more advanced users, and still simple enough and clear enough for
> more cas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92728
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
See also PR 92730 for a related issue (OpenMP's map() does not handle /common/)
Remark, as I only just remembered:
"Named common blocks of the same name shall be of the same size in all scoping
units of a p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92727
--- Comment #8 from David Brown ---
I don't think there is anything more I can add at the moment. Thank you for
your efforts.
1 - 100 of 150 matches
Mail list logo
