[Bug c++/94799] [8/9/10 Regression] Calling a member template function fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94799 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/97608] -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak false positive when returning p+1 instead of p

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97608 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug analyzer/97411] [11 regression] bogus message from gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c after r11-3840

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97411 --- Comment #1 from David Malcolm --- Looks like a dup of PR 97090 (though that one is on arm).

[Bug preprocessor/82359] #line does not allow C++14 quotes in number

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82359 Aaron Ballman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aaron at aaronballman dot com --- Commen

[Bug analyzer/97621] [11 regression] bogus message in gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c after r11-4434

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97621 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/97090] gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c fails on arm and powerpc64*-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug analyzer/97090] gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c fails on arm and powerpc64*-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090 --- Comment #5 from David Malcolm --- PR 97621 reports it as starting on powerpc64*-linux-gnu with r11-4434, which was a fix for non-determinism in -fanalyzer, so perhaps this is a flaky test that the non-determinism fixes have made fail more rel

[Bug analyzer/97090] gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c fails on arm and powerpc64*-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #1) > I see random results from one run to another, so it's likely that something > is not initialized correctly. I think it's due to places in -fanalyzer that iterat

[Bug analyzer/97090] gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c fails on arm and powerpc64*-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090 --- Comment #7 from David Malcolm --- *** Bug 97411 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug analyzer/97411] [11 regression] bogus message from gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c after r11-3840

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97411 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/97614] MinGW-w64 pointer to long conversion loses precision error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97614 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/96608] Build failure due to cast to type long on MinGW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96608 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||brechtsanders at users dot sourcef

[Bug analyzer/96608] Build failure due to cast to type long on MinGW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96608 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|WAITING

[Bug analyzer/96608] Build failure due to cast to type long on MinGW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96608 --- Comment #14 from David Malcolm --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #7) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6) > > What I mean is if you ever traversing a hashtable, the hash should not use > > the value of a pointer because it

[Bug tree-optimization/97609] [11 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl common' structure, have 'component_ref' in tree_could_trap_p, at tree-eh.c:2708

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97609 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod --- Created attachment 49460 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49460&action=edit call infer_non_null directly Looking closer at the non-null deref calls, the problem was deep in stmt_ends_bb_

[Bug fortran/30802] out of bounds error array I/O not picked up with -fbounds-check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30802 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/95132] Concept checked after auto return type deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95132 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:833b180f097e8bae44634e6a31e9c92d661af301 commit r10-8951-g833b180f097e8bae44634e6a31e9c92d661af301 Author: Patrick Palka D

[Bug c++/96675] [10/11 Regression] tautological-compare warning emitted for NTTP bitwise comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96675 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8 commit r11-4501-g976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8 Author: Marek Polacek Date: Sa

[Bug c++/96675] [10 Regression] tautological-compare warning emitted for NTTP bitwise comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96675 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10 Regression] |tauto

[Bug c++/96742] [10/11 Regression] "warning: comparison of unsigned expression in ‘< 0’ is always false" with dependent values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8 commit r11-4501-g976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8 Author: Marek Polacek Date: Sa

[Bug c++/96742] [10 Regression] "warning: comparison of unsigned expression in ‘< 0’ is always false" with dependent values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10 Regression] "warning:

[Bug c++/95132] Concept checked after auto return type deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95132 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/97573] Implement C++20 [depr.arith.conv.enum]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97573 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:455ade18462e5076065b1970e21c622239797392 commit r11-4502-g455ade18462e5076065b1970e21c622239797392 Author: Marek Polacek Date: Tu

[Bug libstdc++/60630] FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.cc (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60630 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME Status|WAITING

[Bug bootstrap/97550] libgcc ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu compiler hosted on msys2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97550 --- Comment #2 from fdlbxtqi --- cp/cp-lang.o c-family/stub-objc.o cp/call.o cp/class.o cp/constexpr.o cp/constraint.o cp/coroutines.o cp/cp-gimplify.o cp/cp-objcp-common.o cp/cp-ubsan.o cp/cvt.o cp/cxx-pretty-print.o cp/decl.o cp/decl2.o c

[Bug analyzer/97608] -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak false positive when returning p+1 instead of p

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97608 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a9af271275f4893e28c789c8f1964025694eda1 commit r11-4510-g1a9af271275f4893e28c789c8f1964025694eda1 Author: David Malcolm Date: We

[Bug analyzer/97608] -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak false positive when returning p+1 instead of p

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97608 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/97620] -fexec-charset=IBM16804 triggers ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97620 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- I don't know of any such macros and -dM -E doesn't show any. Bug 82700 comment 1 explains that "The sprintf pass calls lang_hooks.to_target_charset () to convert each of these characters from the source set t

[Bug bootstrap/97622] New: ubsan ' unterminated quote character ''' in format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97622 Bug ID: 97622 Summary: ubsan ' unterminated quote character ''' in format Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug analyzer/97090] gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c fails on arm and powerpc64*-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090 --- Comment #8 from David Malcolm --- I tested with a cross build on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with target==powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu after various fixes for non-determinism (g:f635f0ce87d687b177b734968f18226d50499e75) and I'm not seeing the bogus di

[Bug c++/97623] New: Extremely slow O2 compile (>>O(n^2))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97623 Bug ID: 97623 Summary: Extremely slow O2 compile (>>O(n^2)) Product: gcc Version: 9.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug tree-optimization/97609] [11 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl common' structure, have 'component_ref' in tree_could_trap_p, at tree-eh.c:2708

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97609 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0162d00d12be24ee3f02ce876adafeaa91c6f7f9 commit r11-4515-g0162d00d12be24ee3f02ce876adafeaa91c6f7f9 Author: Andrew MacLeod Date:

[Bug c++/97623] Extremely slow O2 compile (>>O(n^2))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97623 --- Comment #1 from Wilson Snyder --- P.S. Note gcc -v and related information are comments at top of the attachment.

[Bug other/97417] RISC-V Unnecessary andi instruction when loading volatile bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417 Levy changed: What|Removed |Added CC||admin at levyhsu dot com --- Comment #6 from Levy

[Bug c++/96504] [coroutines] test failures with glibc-2.32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96504 Rimvydas (RJ) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com --- Commen

[Bug c++/97452] [coroutines] incorrect sequencing of await_resume() when multiple co_await expressions occur in a single statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97452 --- Comment #4 from David Ledger --- @Iain Sandoe In terms of the standard do you think this is technically undefined behaviour? I tried bring this up with Std-Proposals but got no response at all. I believe either I'm very bad at writing (likel

[Bug c/97619] error: true/false edge after a non-GIMPLE_COND in bb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97619 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

<    1   2