https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92838
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897
commit r11-779-gc2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37759
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95471
Bug ID: 95471
Summary: vrndvq_f32 not supported on armv8
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #36 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> If the compiler knew say from PGO that pos is usually a multiple of certain
> power of two and that the loop usually iterates many times (I guess the
> latter can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237
--- Comment #6 from Kito Cheng ---
Created attachment 48658
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48658&action=edit
i386-Implement-ROUND_TYPE_ALIGN-to-make-sure-alignme.patch
Some optimization might made decision depend on the ali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95472
Bug ID: 95472
Summary: various diagnostics for C/C++ hyperlinks to gfortran
doc
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95472
--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #0)
> This also happens to -Wreturn-type and -Wuninitialized. Strangely these two
> entries don't even exist in gfortran doc. But it does not happens to
> -Wformat or -Wimpl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95473
Bug ID: 95473
Summary: GCC misses -Wnull-dereference warning in a simple code
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95467
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95465
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95468
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95472
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95473
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95472
--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Well, seems fixed by Jakub at efaffc69 (in master) and a764bbb7 (in gcc-10) so
far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90102
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #37 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020, guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
>
> --- Comment #36 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95152
yagi uwu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yagi.uwu at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95423
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-02
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95425
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93814
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markeggleston at gcc do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95433
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, are we supposed to solve/simplify arbitrary linear equations?
3 * x * x * x + 5 == 8
is equal to x == 1.
3 * x * x + 5 == 8
is equal to abs(x) == 1.
But sure, simple cases. I wonder if something m
101 - 122 of 122 matches
Mail list logo