[Bug c++/92974] diagnostic missing source information

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92974 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- We have a good location when processing the template: (gdb) p loc $4 = (const op_location_t &) @0x7fffc3d0: {m_operator_loc = 0, m_combined_loc = 2147483648} (gdb) p loc.m_combined_loc $5 = 2147483648 (

[Bug target/92905] [10 Regression] Spills float-int union to memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92905 --- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov --- Author: vmakarov Date: Thu Dec 19 21:59:47 2019 New Revision: 279596 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279596&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2019-12-19 Vladimir Makarov PR target/92905 * lr

[Bug fortran/92990] INVALID code with NULLIFY – partially misleading error message "If bounds remapping is specified at (1), the pointer target shall not be NULL"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92990 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|UNCONFI

[Bug c++/92974] diagnostic missing source information

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92974 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug tree-optimization/93013] PPC: optimization around modulo leads to incorrect result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93013 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/92905] [10 Regression] Spills float-int union to memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92905 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/58237] gcc fails to detect obvious resource leaks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58237 --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- Patch committed to dmalcolm/analyzer branch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01425.html Ought to be live on godbolt.org within the next 24 hours.

[Bug tree-optimization/92980] [miss optimization]redundant load missed by fre.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92980 --- Comment #8 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > But that is not true any more. So I think this optimization can be removed > as it is too early. Just double check the above testcase and the C++ > testcase (g++

[Bug target/93022] New: [ARM, AArch32, NEON] Missing 'vld1_s16_x3' intrinsic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93022 Bug ID: 93022 Summary: [ARM, AArch32, NEON] Missing 'vld1_s16_x3' intrinsic Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug fortran/92996] ICE in gfc_conv_array_constructor_expr, at fortran/trans-expr.c:7590

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92996 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

<    1   2