[Bug c++/68372] [concepts] invalid use of pack expansion expression in member function template declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68372 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #6

[Bug c++/82531] ICE: Segmentation fault (-std=c++1z -fconcepts)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82531 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #4

[Bug lto/95190] Documentation for -Wstringop-overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- > "writing 1 bytes into a region of size 0 -Wstringop-overflow=". Yet > -Wno-stringop-overflow is passed to the compiler. I tried disabling the > warning with #pragma diagnostic, no luck there. I must confir

[Bug middle-end/94635] [OpenMP][Offloading] mapping with alloc/delete followed by map(from/tofrom:) fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94635 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a7c5803d4e56c6f6c84a9c5b08adffb0cfe1d79f commit r10-8156-ga7c5803d4e56c6f6c84a9c5b08adffb0cfe1d79f Author: Tobias Burnus D

[Bug libstdc++/95200] user-defined hash function is not copied correctly if unordered_map is declared using an incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95200 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/95200] user-defined hash function is not copied correctly if unordered_map is declared using an incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95200 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Although the actual cause of the behaviour you see is due to violating a different requirement. The explicit specialization hash is not declared in map_obj.h which means it gets implicitly instantiated usin

[Bug libstdc++/95200] user-defined hash function is not copied correctly if unordered_map is declared using an incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95200 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- That's [temp.expl.spec] paragraph 7: If a template, a member template or a member of a class template is explicitly specialized then that specialization shall be declared before the first use of that speci

[Bug fortran/94361] Memory leak in nested types with final

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361 --- Comment #3 from Antony Lewis --- On Windows 8.1.0 does not leak, and on NERSC 8.3.0 20190222 (Cray Inc.) also does not (but 9.2.0 does)... so not exactly sure what this means about when it was introduced.

[Bug target/92658] x86 lacks vector extend / truncate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f6e40195ec3d3b402a5f6c58dbf359479bc4cbfa commit r11-485-gf6e40195ec3d3b402a5f6c58dbf359479bc4cbfa Author: Uros Bizjak Date: Tue Ma

[Bug target/92658] x86 lacks vector extend / truncate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||easyhack Assignee|ubizjak at gma

[Bug tree-optimization/88398] vectorization failure for a small loop to do byte comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398 Jiu Fu Guo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #25

[Bug tree-optimization/95201] New: Some x86 vector-extend patterns are not exercised.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95201 Bug ID: 95201 Summary: Some x86 vector-extend patterns are not exercised. Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug libstdc++/71133] msp430-elf -mlarge FTBFS in libstdc++-v3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71133 jozefl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/66156] [msp430] wrong code generated with -O2 -mlarge (zero extension HI -> SI)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66156 jozefl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/82261] x86: missing peephole for SHLD / SHRD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82261 --- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Michael Clark from comment #2) > Just refreshing this issue. I found it while testing some code-gen on > Godbolt: The combiner creates: Failed to match this instruction: (parallel [ (set

[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 --- Comment #10 from Iain Sandoe --- It seems that the ubsan complaints look all rather similar. At least for the following case, ubsan seems to cause a change which introduces a bogus temporary use. class-00-co-ret.C u=is a very simple coroutin

[Bug tree-optimization/89386] Generation of vectorized MULHRS (Multiply High with Round and Scale) instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89386 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947 Bug 53947 depends on bug 89386, which changed state. Bug 89386 Summary: Generation of vectorized MULHRS (Multiply High with Round and Scale) instruction https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89386 What|Removed

[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 --- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe --- perhaps I have some invalid sharing of trees that only causes an issue for ubsan - will try build independent dtor trees for the two cases.

[Bug c++/95202] New: Assignment to a member is wrongly optimized away by g++ with -fstrict-aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95202 Bug ID: 95202 Summary: Assignment to a member is wrongly optimized away by g++ with -fstrict-aliasing Product: gcc Version: 9.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libgomp/95203] New: OpenACC 2.6 deep copy: attach/detach API routines: no-op behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95203 Bug ID: 95203 Summary: OpenACC 2.6 deep copy: attach/detach API routines: no-op behavior Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: openacc

[Bug libgomp/95203] OpenACC 2.6 deep copy: attach/detach API routines: no-op behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95203 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge --- Created attachment 48561 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48561&action=edit 'mdc-attach-nop-2-r.c'

[Bug bootstrap/95204] New: patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95204 Bug ID: 95204 Summary: patch commit, and making gcc error. Product: gcc Version: 7.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: bootstrap

[Bug bootstrap/95205] New: patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95205 Bug ID: 95205 Summary: patch commit, and making gcc error. Product: gcc Version: 7.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: bootstrap

[Bug libgomp/95203] OpenACC 2.6 deep copy: attach/detach API routines: no-op behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95203 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Schwinge --- Created attachment 48562 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48562&action=edit 'mdc-detach-nop-1-r.c'

[Bug libgomp/95203] OpenACC 2.6 deep copy: attach/detach API routines: no-op behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95203 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Schwinge --- Created attachment 48563 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48563&action=edit 'mdc-detach-nop-2-r.c' I have similar test cases for OpenACC directives (which are to exhibit similar behavio

[Bug target/95151] [9/10/11 Regression] Add cmpmemM pattern for -minline-all-stringops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95151 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Add cmpmemM pattern for |[9/10/11 Regression] Add |-m

[Bug bootstrap/95205] patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95205 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- read the full message, you need to copy gcc/tm.texi to $src/gcc/doc/

[Bug c++/66439] Diagnostic on failed function template lookup is missing a line

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66439 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/94182] Improve -Wchar-subscripts documentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94182 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic CC|

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org K

[Bug bootstrap/95205] patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95205 --- Comment #2 from chengcongxiu at huawei dot com --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > read the full message, you need to copy gcc/tm.texi to $src/gcc/doc/ thanks you! now making is ok!

[Bug c++/41437] No access control for classes in template functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41437 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug target/95182] Change the definition of Pmode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95182 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a641d6d3e631e523e8cf0cfc8b8e324da118dff2 commit r11-496-ga641d6d3e631e523e8cf0cfc8b8e324da118dff2 Author: Nathan Sidwell Date: T

[Bug preprocessor/95183] [11 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in _cpp_lex_direct)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95183 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug sanitizer/94910] detect_stack_use_after_return=1 is much slower than clang's

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94910 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug c++/95206] New: internal compiler error: in sign_mask, at wide-int.h:855

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95206 Bug ID: 95206 Summary: internal compiler error: in sign_mask, at wide-int.h:855 Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug analyzer/95207] New: the papers about gcc optimized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95207 Bug ID: 95207 Summary: the papers about gcc optimized Product: gcc Version: analyzer branch Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: analyzer

[Bug analyzer/95207] the papers about gcc optimized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95207 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/95208] New: missed switch optimization as bit test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95208 Bug ID: 95208 Summary: missed switch optimization as bit test Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug libstdc++/95209] New: std::filesystem::path::lexically_normal mangles "//foo"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95209 Bug ID: 95209 Summary: std::filesystem::path::lexically_normal mangles "//foo" Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug libstdc++/95209] std::filesystem::path::lexically_normal mangles "//foo"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95209 --- Comment #1 from M Welinder --- Created attachment 48567 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48567&action=edit preprocessed test program

[Bug target/95182] Change the definition of Pmode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95182 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug c/95210] New: internal compiler error: in prepare_copy_insn, at gcse.c:1988

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95210 Bug ID: 95210 Summary: internal compiler error: in prepare_copy_insn, at gcse.c:1988 Product: gcc Version: 9.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug preprocessor/95183] [11 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in _cpp_lex_direct)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95183 --- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell --- patch got attached to p95182, because reasons

[Bug rtl-optimization/95211] New: [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 Bug ID: 95211 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code

[Bug libstdc++/95200] user-defined hash function is not copied correctly if unordered_map is declared using an incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95200 --- Comment #4 from jevgenijsz1 at verifone dot com --- Jonathan, Thank you for looking into this. I guess what confused me was copy assignment requirements in 26.2.7 that explicitly say hash function is copied and the hash function is available

[Bug middle-end/60479] convert_move assert failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60479 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug c/95210] internal compiler error: in prepare_copy_insn, at gcse.c:1988

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95210 --- Comment #1 from zhongyunde at tom dot com --- patch for this issue. @ linux-9z2e in ~/software/gcc/gcc on git:master o [23:02:26] $ git diff diff --git a/gcc/gcse.c b/gcc/gcse.c index 8b9518e..65982ec 100644 --- a/gcc/gcse.c +++ b/gcc/gcse.

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 04:38:32AM +, roland.illig at gmx dot de wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 > > --- Comment #2 from Roland Illig --- > >--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc do

[Bug target/95212] New: enum processor_features is out of sync

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95212 Bug ID: 95212 Summary: enum processor_features is out of sync Product: gcc Version: 10.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug c/95213] New: GCC -Werror=conversion error when assigning to a bitfield (when mixing constants and variables)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95213 Bug ID: 95213 Summary: GCC -Werror=conversion error when assigning to a bitfield (when mixing constants and variables) Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/95213] GCC -Werror=conversion error when assigning to a bitfield (when mixing constants and variables)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95213 --- Comment #1 from Seth Robertson --- FYI, discussion on https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61877799/son-of-gcc-conversion-warning-when-assigning-to-a-bitfield

[Bug libstdc++/95200] user-defined hash function is not copied correctly if unordered_map is declared using an incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95200 --- Comment #5 from jevgenijsz1 at verifone dot com --- Moreover if I was to put a breakpoint in struct hash I can see that it is being used 4 times in the code example posted: twice to hash the EnumType on insertion and twice on access (however t

[Bug fortran/95214] New: ICE on assumed-rank character array with select rank

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95214 Bug ID: 95214 Summary: ICE on assumed-rank character array with select rank Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug bootstrap/95205] patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95205 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 95204 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug bootstrap/95204] patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95204 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/95205] patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95205 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/95200] user-defined hash function is not copied correctly if unordered_map is declared using an incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95200 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- It's undefined behaviour so anything can happen.

[Bug libstdc++/95209] std::filesystem::path::lexically_normal mangles "//foo"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95209 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- You didn't provide the requested information when creating a new bug report, please see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ (In reply to M Welinder from comment #0) > lexically_normal transforms "//foo" into "/foo"

[Bug libstdc++/71133] msp430-elf -mlarge FTBFS in libstdc++-v3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71133 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug lto/95190] Documentation for -Wstringop-overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 --- Comment #4 from Mario Charest --- On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 1:09 PM msebor at gcc dot gnu.org < gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 > > Martin Sebor changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug lto/95190] Documentation for -Wstringop-overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 --- Comment #5 from Mario Charest --- On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 2:35 AM rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org < gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 > > --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- > This is new be

[Bug target/94962] Suboptimal AVX2 code for _mm256_zextsi128_si256(_mm_set1_epi8(-1))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94962 --- Comment #7 from Nemo --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #6) > > vmovdqa xmm0, xmm0 is not redundant here, it would clear up 128-256 bit > which is the meaning of `zext`. No, it is redundant because "vpcmpeqd xmm0, xmm0, xmm0" already

[Bug fortran/95215] New: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14079

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95215 Bug ID: 95215 Summary: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14079 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/95216] New: Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Bug ID: 95216 Summary: Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug c++/95206] internal compiler error: in sign_mask, at wide-int.h:855

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95206 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/94955] [10 Regression] ICE in to_wide

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94955 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||danny.schneider at posteo dot de --- Co

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug rtl-optimization/95210] internal compiler error: in prepare_copy_insn, at gcse.c:1988

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95210 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- testcase?

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug c/95217] New: missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95217 Bug ID: 95217 Summary: missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug c++/95202] Assignment to a member is wrongly optimized away by g++ with -fstrict-aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95202 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection --- Comment #1 from Ric

[Bug c/64639] missing warning by -Wunused-value in compound expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64639 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug c/95217] missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95217 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Blocks|

[Bug c/89180] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wunused warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89180 Bug 89180 depends on bug 95217, which changed state. Bug 95217 Summary: missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95217 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- This is an internal only builtin which is created only via the vectorizer.

[Bug c/44677] Warn for variables incremented but not used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44677 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2010-06-28 00:34:58 |2020-5-19 --- Comment #10 from Martin Seb

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinsk

[Bug target/95218] New: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218 Bug ID: 95218 Summary: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/95219] New: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219 Bug ID: 95219 Summary: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/95218] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/95149] lex.c:1729:8: warning: result of comparison against a string literal is unspecified (use an explicit string comparison function instead) [-Wstring-compare]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95149 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/95109] [11 regression] ICE in gfortran.dg/gomp/target1.f90 after r11-349

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95109 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/94923] False positive -Wclass-memaccess with trivially copyable std::optional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94923 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c0d8623ce5aa6d92c2e6c62e1bee66272a011f59 commit r11-499-gc0d8623ce5aa6d92c2e6c62e1bee66272a011f59 Author: Martin Sebor Date: Tue M

[Bug c++/95149] lex.c:1729:8: warning: result of comparison against a string literal is unspecified (use an explicit string comparison function instead) [-Wstring-compare]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95149 --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #4) > Fixed ed63c387aa0 g:ed63c387aa0

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confir

[Bug target/94591] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Assembler messages: Error: operand mismatch -- `rev64 v0.2d,v0.2d' (or `rev32 v0.2s,v0.2s')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94591 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98452668d362bb9e6358f7eb5cff69f4f5ab1d45 commit r11-502-g98452668d362bb9e6358f7eb5cff69f4f5ab1d45 Author: Alex Coplan Date: Tue May

[Bug libgcc/95220] New: Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 Bug ID: 95220 Summary: Incorrect GFNI dectection Product: gcc Version: 10.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assig

[Bug middle-end/24786] Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/31279] Uninitialized warning for call-by-reference arguments with known intent(in)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31279 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/95221] New: g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 Bug ID: 95221 Summary: g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug testsuite/39353] Linker warning causing tests to fail (960218 and 20030913)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39353 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-05-19 CC|

[Bug target/94591] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Assembler messages: Error: operand mismatch -- `rev64 v0.2d,v0.2d' (or `rev32 v0.2s,v0.2s')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94591 Alex Coplan changed: What|Removed |Added CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org Resolut

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek --- It is caused by this code: 853 if (flag_strong_eval_order == 2 854 && CALL_EXPR_FN (*expr_p) 855 && cp_get_callee_fndecl_nofold (*expr_p) == NULL_TREE) 856 { 857

[Bug middle-end/24786] Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 dank at kegel dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug other/90556] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wreturn-local-addr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90556 Bug 90556 depends on bug 24786, which changed state. Bug 24786 Summary: Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 What|Removed |Add

  1   2   >