https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99207
Bug ID: 99207
Summary: #pragma pack(1) and __int128 lead to bad optimization
under O2 and higher optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99125
--- Comment #4 from G. Steinmetz ---
> What was the reason for the (7:8) in the testcase?
If this question was directed at me, some background :
The problem occurred during verification tests,
in other code constellation and with other numbers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99125
--- Comment #5 from G. Steinmetz ---
I also checked this invalid (probably a known issue) :
$ cat za.f90
program p
character(:), allocatable :: a(:)
character(8) :: c(2) = '12 45 78'
a = c
print *, a(7:8)
end
$ gfortran-11-2021022
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99200
--- Comment #4 from JoaoBapt ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
> Looks like a dup of 93383.
No, because it works perfectly when I substitute __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ for any
other string literal, even as big as one that would be "return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99207
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99196
--- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
Note if errcode == 0 then error does NOT exit :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99204
--- Comment #3 from G. Steinmetz ---
Strange, for me the ICE is reproducible on different machines
and also on https://godbolt.org/ (!) -- always with -O2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99138
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #2)
> Confirmed – with 'class(*), allocatable :: f(:)' it should be valid (with
> prior assignment).
>
> The problem is in gfc_match_rvalue:
>
> 3737 if (sym->
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99204
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99185
--- Comment #5 from kal.conley at dectris dot com ---
I don't think this has anything to do with C++20. The behavior doesn't change
when compiling for C++17. In any case, `g` should be static initialized with
zeros and no dynamic initialization in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99206
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66171
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|8.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99138
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #3)
> Is the problem not that the parser is not picking up the incorrectly placed
> print statement? It should never be passed to the matcher because it is in
> the conta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99208
Bug ID: 99208
Summary: [modules] ICE with partitions & instantiations of
linkage-typedef structs
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99208
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99206
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
As a sidenote:
print *, len (reshape (['a'], [0]))
end
This prints 0 for gcc-11, and the correct value 1 for 10.2.1.
Do we screw up things during simplification?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99204
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 04:36:50AM +, jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
> Steve, if you think this does it. I will get it ready to commit for you. Does
> it al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99204
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:57:03PM +, sgk at troutmask dot
apl.washington.edu wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301
>
> --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl ---
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99206
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90857
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It was pointed out on IRC that splice_after is affected the same way (if we
change anything for erase_after we should do the same for splice_after).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99209
Bug ID: 99209
Summary: lambdas in function template signatures instantiated
with wrong semantic context
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96251
--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe ---
patch posted :
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-February/565649.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99185
--- Comment #6 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Now that I think about and having read relevant chapters of C++20 spec,
observed behavior seems to be expected.
A cannot be constant initialized (because it has missing initializer for
'value' me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99209
--- Comment #1 from Richard Smith ---
Here's a more interesting example: https://godbolt.org/z/83c36q
#include
constexpr char f(...) { return 'g'; }
constexpr decltype(auto) f_adl(auto a) { return f(a); }
namespace A {
constexpr char f(a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99201
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) ---
Manual reduction which fails with 8-11 and compiles ok with 7:
template
void
test_values_2arg(F&&... fun_pack)
{
(fun_pack(V(), V()), ...);
}
template
auto
make_tester(const TestF&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99206
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99185
--- Comment #7 from kal.conley at dectris dot com ---
There is no fiasco here because the default constructor of `A` does no dynamic
initialization. If the definition of `A` is changed to:
struct A {
int value;
};
then the error goes away. How
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99178
--- Comment #3 from Mark Wielaard ---
So if the compiler would emit the .debug_name index would that make any
link/post-processing steps easier or more efficient?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #58 from Martin Sebor ---
Jeff's POC also suggests a workaround: changing the type of
_Optional_payload_base::_M_engaged from bool to unsigned char avoids the
VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR and avoids the warning. The difference in the uninit IL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99185
--- Comment #8 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
It does not matter whether A constructor is default or empty. If class instance
cannot be constant-initialized then dynamic initialization will take place.
I think gcc just incorrectly performs c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99193
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99210
Bug ID: 99210
Summary: X editing for reading file with encoding='utf-8'
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99210
Serguei E. Leontiev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||leo at sai dot msu.ru
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99176
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Same problem for:
constexpr int* ptr = (int *) (const int *) nullptr;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99173
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:609204abb889166c17a600121ba8ced18db2567a
commit r11-7332-g609204abb889166c17a600121ba8ced18db2567a
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri Feb 19 15:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99138
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
The following fails the same way:
module m
interface
module function f()
class(*), allocatable :: f(:)
end
end interface
contains
module function f(x)
class(*), allocat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98181
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99173
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99196
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5ee4ba031dd9fc60bf2494ca30f46c0acaa34805
commit r11-7333-g5ee4ba031dd9fc60bf2494ca30f46c0acaa34805
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99196
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897
--- Comment #8 from Damian Rouson ---
Thanks, Paul and Tobias!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99210
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-23
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #4 from Jiangning Liu ---
Hi Honza,
Do you see any other real case problems if the patch
g:1118a3ff9d3ad6a64bba25dc01e7703325e23d92 is not applied?
If exchange2 is the only one affected by this patch so far, and because we have
obse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:198c56052ea8cce4196e60c0dc3187bf3d67a786
commit r11-7337-g198c56052ea8cce4196e60c0dc3187bf3d67a786
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95757
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-07-01 00:00:00 |2021-2-23
--- Comment #14 from Hans
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96997
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99211
Bug ID: 99211
Summary: gcc fails on program which overrides __builtin_clzll
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
Bug ID: 99212
Summary: [11 Regression] gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c line
971
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99213
Bug ID: 99213
Summary: Incorrect pretty printing of local class type when
type's context contains a class template
specialization
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99172
--- Comment #5 from gcc-user at riseup dot net ---
Starting with gcc-10 gentoo is not going to enable --enable-vtable-verify by
default anymore.
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=63c16d8b5e71b5f8e6185965062cf9c836800c29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99213
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka ---
"Started" with r10-7705.
Fixing this is necessary for comprehensible diagnostics when using range
adaptor objects from , since their partial application and composition
operators work by returning local lamb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99214
Bug ID: 99214
Summary: Incorrect template arguments shown in constraint
satisfaction failure diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99214
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka ---
Changed with r11-2774.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99215
Bug ID: 99215
Summary: coroutines: debugging with gdb
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
101 - 157 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
