https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82904
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #6)
> Do I understand Richard's comment correctly that we should get for
>
>character(:), allocatable, save :: x
>
> in the dump sth. like:
>
> static integer(kind=4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92098
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 92098, which changed state.
Bug 92098 Summary: [9 Regression] After r262333, the following code cannot be
vectorized on powerpc64le.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92098
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 91222, which changed state.
Bug 91222 Summary: [10 Regression] 507.cactuBSSN_r build fails in
warn_types_mismatch at ipa-devirt.c:1006 since r273571
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222
What|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Dec 2 08:51:49 2019
New Revision: 278894
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278894&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/92712
* match.pd ((A * B) +- A -> (B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92741
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
This comes from:
if (!useless_type_conversion_p (TREE_TYPE (rhs), TREE_TYPE (v->value)))
{
if (fold_convertible_p (TREE_TYPE (rhs), v->value))
val = fold_bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92747
Bug ID: 92747
Summary: x86 vector builtins throw exceptions
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92133
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 92133, which changed state.
Bug 92133 Summary: Support multi versioning on self recursive function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92133
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92747
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Ok, I've just updated LNT filter, and one can see it better with:
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/spec_report/branch?sorting=gcc-9%2Cgcc-trunk&all_elf_detail_stats=on
I'm going to bisect the WRF s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92742
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92742
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Dec 2 10:50:45 2019
New Revision: 278896
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278896&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-12-02 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92742
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92737
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92739
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100
MarkEggleston changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91985
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92695
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For #c12, I think that is because of:
5615 /* Defer virtual destructors so that thunks get the right
5616 linkage. */
5617 if (DECL_VIRTUAL_P (decl) && !at_eof)
5618
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92748
Bug ID: 92748
Summary: Two different -Wreturn-type diagnostics for
essentially same code
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92741
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #4)
> This comes from:
>
> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (TREE_TYPE (rhs), TREE_TYPE (v->value)))
> {
> if (fold_convertible_p (TREE_TY
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92747
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68230
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #10)
> Martin Jambor's IPA-SRA rewrite might be relevant here; it sounded like the
> new IPA-SRA will remove parameters that are unused like this, but I didn't
> quite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #7)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> > So wrf grew starting with r271377, size (w/o debug info) goes from 20164464B
> > to 23674792.
>
> Also check the build time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92747
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 2 Dec 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92747
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92746
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92747
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or add an attribute that would work as nothrow if called from
-fno-non-call-exceptions and as nothing otherwise.
Though, e.g. for C++ sin in the library is really marked throw () rather than
using nothrow att
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92734
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The (A +- CST1) +- CST2 -> A + CST3 pattern already does handle casts it seems,
it is just the other two that don't.
That has been added in r249447 with a follow-up fix in r257683.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92326
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92749
Bug ID: 92749
Summary: warning: inlining failed in call to ‘salsa20’: --param
max-inline-insns-single limit reached after r276516
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92749
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2019-12-2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #9 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> > > So wrf grew starting with r271377, size (w/o debug info) goes from
> > > 20164464
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92750
Bug ID: 92750
Summary: DSE fails to remove all dead clobbers
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92751
Bug ID: 92751
Summary: VN partial def support confused about clobbers
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92751
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92734
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92750
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92682
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looking through all the tester logs I see a handful of failures on power 7, 8,
and 9 in late October/early November but none since so if there was a problem
it appears to have cleared up.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82380
Casey Carter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cjdb.ns at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
creduce gives:
template struct c { typedef a d[b]; };
template struct h { typename c::d e; };
template using g __attribute__((vector_size(sizeof(f = float;
void i() { h, 4>{g{}, {}}; }
as something tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Better testcase:
template struct c { typedef a d[b]; };
template struct array {
typename c::d e;
a operator[](long);
};
template
using vec4_t __attribute__((vector_size(4*sizeof(T = float;
auto tran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92718
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Modifying const members of a struct is undefined, regardless of how it's done:
either by assignment or by overwriting it using memset. GCC doesn't diagnose
it yet but I expect it will, maybe as early as in GC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92712
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] |[8/9 Regression]
|Perf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91906
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Dec 2 16:23:06 2019
New Revision: 278902
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278902&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++: Fix timed_mutex::try_lock_until on arbitrary clock (PR 91906)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78237
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Dec 2 16:23:01 2019
New Revision: 278901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++: PR 78237 Add full steady_clock support to timed_mutex
The pth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78237
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Dec 2 16:23:10 2019
New Revision: 278903
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278903&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++: Add full steady_clock support to shared_timed_mutex
The pthre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91906
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Dec 2 16:23:14 2019
New Revision: 278904
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278904&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++: Fix try_lock_until and try_lock_shared_until on arbitrary cloc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92739
Christopher Di Bella changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82380
--- Comment #7 from Christopher Di Bella ---
*** Bug 92739 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82380
--- Comment #8 from Christopher Di Bella ---
The above (presumably) works in 466691493b9, but not in commits starting from
Git hash 6b42dfe4264.
Bugzilla autolink: r278774
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78237
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91906
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92752
Bug ID: 92752
Summary: Bogus "ignored qualifiers" warning on const-qualified
pointer-to-member-function objects
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> So wrf grew starting with r271377, size (w/o debug info) goes from 20164464B
> to 23674792.
I think we've had this discussion before, although I cannot offhand
r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #11 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #10)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> > So wrf grew starting with r271377, size (w/o debug info) goes from 20164464B
> > to 23674792.
>
> I think we've had this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92741
--- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Mon Dec 2 17:51:08 2019
New Revision: 278910
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278910&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Tighten check for vector types in fold_convertible_p (PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66773
--- Comment #24 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Daniel Marjamäki from comment #23)
> > If the user expects C to provide tests for "mathematically different", the
> user has some learning to do.
>
> I believe most users can appreciate th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92741
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91025
--- Comment #2 from Stephen Kell ---
Created attachment 47405
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47405&action=edit
Patch to cpp manual page's description of -MD
It took me long enough, but I'm fairly sure this patch results in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90076
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #2 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90499
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #2 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92753
Bug ID: 92753
Summary: ICE in gfc_trans_call, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:392
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92753
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92754
Bug ID: 92754
Summary: ICE in gfc_finish_var_decl, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:693
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92398
--- Comment #8 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The changes in r278890 fix the earlier problems but introduce new ones:
failures in r278889 (not seen in r278890):
FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr72804.c scan-assembler-times not 4
FAIL: gcc.target/p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92755
Bug ID: 92755
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in gfc_dep_resolver, at
fortran/dependency.c:2123
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92756
Bug ID: 92756
Summary: [9/10 Regression] ICE in lower_omp, at omp-low.c:12988
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
Bug ID: 92757
Summary: Documentation ambiguous/misleading about interplay of
optimization and warning flags
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>is too general and important a piece of information to be buried in the
>documentation of individual warning flags.
Yes because you should read the whole documentation rather than bits and pieces
of it. W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92758
Bug ID: 92758
Summary: [10 regression] r278833 breaks
gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splat-floatdouble.c
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
--- Comment #2 from Ricardo Abreu ---
Saying "-Wall enables all the warnings that [...]" is inaccurate. Unless you
consider a very specific interpretation of "enables". Then it is ambiguous,
because there are other valid (and probably more intuit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
--- Comment #3 from Ricardo Abreu ---
Note that I would classify this as a request for improvement rather than a bug.
A manual is not a specification, it is something that should inform users, and
its contents can be better or worse in achieving
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92176
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #3)
> 276.ira:
>
>
> /* Give the backend a chance to disallow the mode change. */
> if (GET_MODE_CLASS (xmode) != MODE_COMPLEX_INT
> && GET_MODE_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92759
Bug ID: 92759
Summary: Typo in libstdcxx/v6/xmethods.py
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92709
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92695
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Dec 2 21:33:06 2019
New Revision: 278912
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278912&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/92695
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_constant_expression)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92759
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92760
Bug ID: 92760
Summary: [10 regression] several vector test cases fail on
power 7 after r278800
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
Bug ID: 92761
Summary: hash_table::expand invokes assignment on invalid
objects
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't think this is a valid testcase, given:
Both KeyId and Value may be non-trivial (non-POD) types provided
a suitabe Traits class.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
--- Comment #5 from Ricardo Abreu ---
> It has an unambiguous meaning:
>
> $ gcc -Q --help=warnings | fgrep maybe-uninit
> -Wmaybe-uninitialized [disabled]
> $ gcc -Q --help=warnings -Wall | fgrep maybe-uninit
> -Wmaybe-uninit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Ricardo Abreu from comment #5)
> The sentence I quoted says -Wall enables a certain group of warnings, not
> flags. It goes on to characterize that group. It conveys information on its
> own, w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92521
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92762
Bug ID: 92762
Summary: hash_table::empty_slow invokes assignment on invalid
objects
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92762
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 92762 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Only values are being used in the whole of GCC are all PODs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88704
--- Comment #4 from Joseph S. Myers ---
Author: jsm28
Date: Tue Dec 3 01:27:43 2019
New Revision: 278917
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278917&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Diagnose use of [*] in old-style parameter definitions (PR c/88704).
GC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88704
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92761
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92398
--- Comment #9 from Xiong Hu XS Luo ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #8)
> The changes in r278890 fix the earlier problems but introduce new ones:
>
> failures in r278889 (not seen in r278890):
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr72804.c scan-assem
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
