https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98432
--- Comment #7 from Tomáš Hering ---
I'm a bit lost, which github branch corresponds to 10.x that you mention,
please?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99095
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ebotcazou at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98432
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Tomáš Hering from comment #7)
> I'm a bit lost, which github branch corresponds to 10.x that you mention,
> please?
gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc
branch : releases/gcc-10
(currently 10.2.1 - which will be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98432
--- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
> (In reply to Tomáš Hering from comment #7)
> > I'm a bit lost, which github branch corresponds to 10.x that you mention,
> > please?
>
> gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc
>
> bra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99315
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Also, I'd add that
#pragma message "foo " "bar " "baz"
already works fine because it is done in the FE and not in libcpp and so it can
use pragma_lex under the hood to do this.
And, it also has
if (pragma_l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99322
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99324
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99323
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|[9/10/11 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99326
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99324
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Wouldn't it be better to remove the mark_addressable call from build_va_arg and
call {c,cxx}_mark_addressable in the callers instead.
That way we'd also e.g. diagnose invalid (on i686-linux):
register __built
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99323
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Slightly reduced test-case:
$ cat x.c
typedef struct {
} REFERENCE;
#define LIM2() LIM1()
#define LIM3() LIM2() LIM2() LIM2() LIM2() LIM2() LIM2()
#define LIM4()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99324
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Wouldn't it be better to remove the mark_addressable call from build_va_arg
> and call {c,cxx}_mark_addressable in the callers instead.
Sure, or make it a langh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99335
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to AJ D from comment #0)
> I was using CentOS6.8 with gcc 6.2. However, trying other versions of GCC
> didn't make any difference.
GCC 6.2 is no longer supported, so we don't want bug reports for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99335
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82959
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aatsnps at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99337
Bug ID: 99337
Summary: Sanitizer detect heap-buffer-overflow in
checkModFileAlias
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82959
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99333
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95757
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff92ede8d269375f800e1b347a48f4698874b4a3
commit r11-7448-gff92ede8d269375f800e1b347a48f4698874b4a3
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99338
Bug ID: 99338
Summary: -f and -l variants of cmath functions missing (e.g.
std::cosf() and std::cosl())
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95757
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316
Bug 85316 depends on bug 95757, which changed state.
Bug 95757 Summary: [11 regression] missing warning in
gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-25.c since r11-1517
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95757
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99338
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79700
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tilman.vogel at web dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99338
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
As I said in bug 79700, their existence prior to C++17 was underspecified. They
were never mentioned in the previous standards.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99324
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99326
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
This looks very much like an error I looked at before.
I think that was for 'select rank (y => x)', which
has the same issue as 'select type (y => x)' or
as this PR shows 'associate (y=>x)'.
Additionally, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99228
--- Comment #5 from g.peterh...@t-online.de ---
Here is a better test case. https://godbolt.org/z/3Gq783
I've found:
sgn_complex
- always inefficient code, TYPE and SIZE do not matter, even with -Ofast or
-fast-math
for TYPE=double
SIZE=1
- abs/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99339
Bug ID: 99339
Summary: Poor codegen with simple varargs
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99333
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The problem is not path::is_absolute(), it's path::has_root_name(), which (by
design) only handles //rootname on Cygwin:
#ifdef __CYGWIN__
// Interpret "//x" as a root-name, not root-dir + filename
# defin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99340
Bug ID: 99340
Summary: [10/11 Regression] -Werror=maybe-uninitialized warning
with -fPIE, but not -fPIC
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99340
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99333
--- Comment #2 from Moritz Bunkus ---
The following code tests forward & backward slashes with both std::filesystem
(gcc 10.2.0, mingw via MXE) and boost::filesystem (Boost 1.74.0):
auto slashes = R"(//server/share/file.txt)"s;
auto back
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99340
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
PIC allows interposing ags_midi_buffer_util_get_varlength and thus possibly
initializing the argument. PIE does not allow this so we see it is not
initialized.
I suppose the change on the branch is for som
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99339
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99339
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, clang manages to produce the following, which shows the situation could be
worse ;)
test_va:# @test_va
.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
subq$88, %rsp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99340
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
Created attachment 50284
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50284&action=edit
preprocessed source
original test case before reducing
gcc -std=gnu99 -Werror=uninitialized -Werror=maybe-uni
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96960
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e52f8ec25c0e58ebd083e8370e2fbc8af4120d87
commit r11-7454-ge52f8ec25c0e58ebd083e8370e2fbc8af4120d87
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96443
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e52f8ec25c0e58ebd083e8370e2fbc8af4120d87
commit r11-7454-ge52f8ec25c0e58ebd083e8370e2fbc8af4120d87
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99340
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #3)
> Created attachment 50284 [details]
> preprocessed source
>
> original test case before reducing
>
> gcc -std=gnu99 -Werror=uninitialized -Werror=maybe-uninitial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99339
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
So we could try to lower even va_start/end to expose the va_list meta fully
to the middle-end early which should eventually allow eliding it. That
would require introducing other builtins/internal fns to al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99333
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Moritz Bunkus from comment #2)
> while Boost recognizes both.
That's what I wanted to know, thanks.
> Note that __CYGWIN__ is not defined with the compiler from MXE!
Obviously, because it's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99340
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99341
Bug ID: 99341
Summary: [11 Regression] new std::call_once is not backwards
compatible
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99339
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99341
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99333
--- Comment #4 from Moritz Bunkus ---
Oh right, sorry — I misread your earlier comment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99341
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The new implementation added these new symbols to libstdc++.so:
_ZNSt9once_flag11_M_activateEv
_ZNSt9once_flag9_M_finishEb
I think I'd like to keep them, but have the new implementation disabled by
defaul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99307
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #4)
> (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> > Reduced test
>
> While -fsanitize=address,undefined does not find anything on
> x86_64-gnu-linux, I do see w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99339
--- Comment #5 from Mathias Stearn ---
I filed a related bug with clang right after this one if anyone want to follow
along https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49395.
Just because clang does worse doesn't mean gcc shouldn't do better ;)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82959
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99342
Bug ID: 99342
Summary: Clobbered register used for input operand (aarch64)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95079
--- Comment #5 from Mathias Stearn ---
@François Dumont: Sorry I didn't see your question earlier. The reason that
unordered_map perf hurts on 64-bit platforms is because it is designed to do a
size_t modulus-by-prime on every lookup, and on most
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99342
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99342
--- Comment #2 from Stewart Hildebrand ---
Created attachment 50286
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50286&action=edit
Preprocessed file
I compressed the sched.ii file since it exceeded 1000KB. I've attached
sched.ii.tar.gz a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99340
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
GCC 9 warns as well. I think this was a false negative which is now fixed.
Note GCC 10.1.0 and GCC 10.2.0 warn for me as well, so something must have
regressed this between 10.2.0 and g:eddcb627ccfbd97e025
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99337
--- Comment #1 from Vittorio Zecca ---
This issue was found with the address sanitizer, while issues in bug
63426 were found with the undefined behavior sanitizer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99337
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|63426 |86656
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99342
Stewart Hildebrand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99323
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #26 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62125ef043e19c58780bc06d0e2f2221bbbf28f6
commit r10-9401-g62125ef043e19c58780bc06d0e2f2221bbbf28f6
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99343
Bug ID: 99343
Summary: Suggest: -H option support output to file
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: preproc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99342
Stewart Hildebrand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50286|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99339
--- Comment #6 from Mathias Stearn ---
> The question is how common in the wild it is and if it is worth the work.
I'm not sure how common it is, but this is my use case. The code in the bug
report is a slightly simplified example from some Real
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99344
Bug ID: 99344
Summary: [modules] import failure with intermediate namespace
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99344
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93090
--- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
It seems that the gccrs frontend is now sponsored by two companies, so I think
it's fine to stop the Bountysource campaign [1] and move the money to other
Bountysource campaigns.
> [1] https://ru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99317
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95079
--- Comment #6 from François Dumont ---
Thanks for the feedback.
If this is still a problem for you after this enhancement you should perhaps
try the _Power2_rehash_policy provided as an extension. In
testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/insert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99095
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:168b75ff54b4e70650b8709816edff13f93e737a
commit r11-7456-g168b75ff54b4e70650b8709816edff13f93e737a
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99095
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7297af89ea22c1a1da8609d811e100cf73e574d6
commit r10-9402-g7297af89ea22c1a1da8609d811e100cf73e574d6
Author: Eric Botcazou
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99095
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99321
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 50288
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50288&action=edit
gcc11-pr99321.patch
Untested fix for the peephole2.
The rest will be done separately.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99345
Bug ID: 99345
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in
doloop_contained_procedure_code, at
fortran/frontend-passes.c:2464
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99346
Bug ID: 99346
Summary: [aarch64] ICE in gen_rtx_SUBREG, at emit-rtl.c:1021
Product: gcc
Version: 8.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99319
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5a233ae4d8c978a3c863c8199d6c3050389a84d1
commit r11-7457-g5a233ae4d8c978a3c863c8199d6c3050389a84d1
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99337
--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ---
Fix is trivial
--- a/gcc/d/dmd/dmodule.c
+++ b/gcc/d/dmd/dmodule.c
@@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ static void checkModFileAlias(OutBuffer *buf, OutBuffer
*dotmods,
const char *m = (*ms)[j];
const char *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99251
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66ecb059c9d77cfcfb06cbdc3cac6a63b9e67f3d
commit r11-7458-g66ecb059c9d77cfcfb06cbdc3cac6a63b9e67f3d
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99251
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95507
Bug 95507 depends on bug 99251, which changed state.
Bug 99251 Summary: [11 Regression] inconsistent -Wnonnull warning behaviour
with dynamic_cast
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99251
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99295
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:397ed1dbffe6c4a48548b601b35699e571e200a3
commit r11-7459-g397ed1dbffe6c4a48548b601b35699e571e200a3
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99295
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|11.0|
Summary|[9/10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99346
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98875
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99347
Bug ID: 99347
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in
create_block_for_bookkeeping, at sel-sched.c:4549
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99347
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99348
Bug ID: 99348
Summary: ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at
fortran/resolve.c:1286
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99348
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99345
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99349
Bug ID: 99349
Summary: ICE in match_data_constant, at fortran/decl.c:426
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99350
Bug ID: 99350
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_get_symbol_decl, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:1869
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99351
Bug ID: 99351
Summary: ICE in gfc_finish_var_decl, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:695
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99346
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93235
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99346
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> This is a dup of bug 93235.
I should note I reduced it to that bug report and looking at the
expand/optimized dumps to see it was also.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99347
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-02
Summary|[9/10/11 Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99347
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
And before that it was fixed in r7-6819-gd4cbfca47f47194a.
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
