https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96029
vvinayag at arm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vvinayag at arm dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
Matthew Wilcox changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matthew at wil dot cx
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96029
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See Bug 99983
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The particular ICE could be fixed also e.g. with:
--- gcc/simplify-rtx.c.jj 2021-01-05 10:59:00.279810449 +0100
+++ gcc/simplify-rtx.c 2021-04-09 16:18:24.275668496 +0200
@@ -470,6 +470,30 @@ simplify_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This should fix it:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/hashtable.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/hashtable.h
@@ -1319,8 +1319,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
_H1, _H2, _Hash, _RehashPo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Bug ID: 8
Summary: Unnecessary jump instruction
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99806
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:625dadaf5df5a2ae0d8c5660fd1eec8ba354479c
commit r11-8095-g625dadaf5df5a2ae0d8c5660fd1eec8ba354479c
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Bug ID: 9
Summary: segmentation fault when declaring concept in module
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99806
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] ICE: in |[10 Regression] ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99900
--- Comment #8 from tk ---
Hello Patrick,
> Can you or anyone guestimate / speculate how big a bounty in USD value would
> be required to get this ticket implemented in gcc as well as getting a patch
> merged at VirtualBox starting to use this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Marcin Nowak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jasio.lpn at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Bug ID: 10
Summary: arm: Missed optimisation storing V4DF vector
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99547
--- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon ---
Apparently not, the last occurrence was with r11-7662
(g:9844eeff5abd129fab5a4cbd004b814c073a95a1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99864
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99806
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stream009 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99849
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99985
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:637418ec2c6f559d4fac074db3bafc34a728484b
commit r10-9679-g637418ec2c6f559d4fac074db3bafc34a728484b
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2ed860be33b61ea553bf44976ef877c8356d601b
commit r10-9680-g2ed860be33b61ea553bf44976ef877c8356d601b
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97995
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99849
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97995
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96825
--- Comment #6 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> I believe there have been improvements recently - can you re-assess the
> magnitude of the problem? The corresponding ARM PR got re-targeted to GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84991
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffa0ae6eeef3ad15d3f288283e4c477193052f1a
commit r11-8096-gffa0ae6eeef3ad15d3f288283e4c477193052f1a
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84992
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffa0ae6eeef3ad15d3f288283e4c477193052f1a
commit r11-8096-gffa0ae6eeef3ad15d3f288283e4c477193052f1a
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90779
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffa0ae6eeef3ad15d3f288283e4c477193052f1a
commit r11-8096-gffa0ae6eeef3ad15d3f288283e4c477193052f1a
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84991
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:60b589b5858fb8ad414583c6b493e0897f1bde5f
commit r10-9681-g60b589b5858fb8ad414583c6b493e0897f1bde5f
Author: Thomas Schwing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84992
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:60b589b5858fb8ad414583c6b493e0897f1bde5f
commit r10-9681-g60b589b5858fb8ad414583c6b493e0897f1bde5f
Author: Thomas Schwing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90779
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:60b589b5858fb8ad414583c6b493e0897f1bde5f
commit r10-9681-g60b589b5858fb8ad414583c6b493e0897f1bde5f
Author: Thomas Schwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90215
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00c3c31be43c018870569a599200a8af84956487
commit r11-8097-g00c3c31be43c018870569a599200a8af84956487
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11
Bug ID: 11
Summary: [GCN offloading] Occasional C++
'libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/static-variable-1.c'
execution failure
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99989
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84992
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/OpenACC/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84991
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90215
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12
Bug ID: 12
Summary: internal compiler error: in hashtab_chk_error, at
hash-table.c:137
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
ubmit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
g++ (GCC) 11.0.1 20210409 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free softwa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99984
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
ource if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
g++ (GCC) 11.0.1 20210409 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13
Bug ID: 13
Summary: internal compiler error: in merge_exception_specifiers
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Without the directive:
q.C:6:22: error: declaration of ‘S::S() noexcept (T::value)’ has a different
exception specifier
6 | template S::S() noexcept(T::value) {}
| ^~~~
q.C:4:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99985
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6b66d162835621c81a78f361416149d914d31de8
commit r9-9335-g6b66d162835621c81a78f361416149d914d31de8
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9aeab5815df1ec52b1048a157ef243a4c45234b7
commit r9-9336-g9aeab5815df1ec52b1048a157ef243a4c45234b7
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99985
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Bug 2 depends on bug 99985, which changed state.
Bug 99985 Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] bits/hashtable.h:483:9: error: body of
‘constexpr’ function ... not a return-statement since
g:1cbba49e3417d9b0661e70301d6fb7a7f52fd360
https://gcc.gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99648
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47785
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
I'd like to backport it to GCC 9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92546
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The other improvement we could make for C++20 is to replace in
with smaller pieces, as it doesn't need the definition
of std::streambuf_iterator:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/ranges_algobase.h
+++ b/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14
Bug ID: 14
Summary: Dead write not removed when indirection is introduced.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14
--- Comment #1 from AK ---
godbolt link: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/f7Y6G1svf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> In particular, it is combine_simplify_rtx that is called on:
> (zero_extend:SI (subreg:QI (ior:TI (and:TI (reg/v:TI 103 [ f ])
> (const_int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99983
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Maxim Kuvyrkov from comment #3)
> It appears to be
> ===
> commit 1c4e8a96cd695c03ff85299bf2392476feae99bb
> Author: François Dumont
> Date: Mon Jan 20 19:15:43 2020 +0100
>
> libstdc++: Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
Bug ID: 15
Summary: undefined reference to `_rdrand64_step'
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r160297 or r160298 I think.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Because it's declared as:
extern __inline int
__attribute__((__gnu_inline__, __always_inline__, __artificial__))
_rdrand64_step (unsigned long long *__P)
The artificial attribute prevents taking the add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27589
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|24639 |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36823
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2019-02-24 00:00:00 |2021-4-9
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99984
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> The following Glibc bug calls for suppressing the warning by adding
> attribute access none to the function declaration:
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97936
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Rodgers ---
I believe it is addressed in the most recent patch I have submitted for the
atomic wait/notify, barriers, latches, semaphores functionality.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14
Daniel Colascione changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dancol at dancol dot org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I'm not sure how/why "artificial" should prevent taking the address though?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I don't understand what is wrong about that.
(clobber:TI (const_int 0 [0])) in there stands for couldn't figure out what
this value is or how to represent it, so it is wildcard for I don't know what
the valu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
The problem is that, when we're in a system header,
check_redeclaration_exception_specification doesn't emit an error:
1242 if (DECL_IN_SYSTEM_HEADER (old_decl))
1243 complained = pedwarn (n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99984
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
The same change should be made there (in uclibc). FWIW, I looked for a bug
database to report the problem there but, AFAICS, uclibc-ng is the currently
maintained fork, but it has no bug database (https://bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55288
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b04093adb28bd6ee8b0390e840219fd2bba134db
commit r11-8099-gb04093adb28bd6ee8b0390e840219fd2bba134db
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16
Bug ID: 16
Summary: ICE: in dependent_type_p, at cp/pt.c:26745
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99648
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/simplify-rtx.c.jj 2021-04-09 16:18:24.275668496 +0200
+++ gcc/simplify-rtx.c 2021-04-09 19:26:24.963134240 +0200
@@ -7059,12 +7059,19 @@ simplify_immed_subreg (fixed_size_mode o
while (b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to 康桓瑋 from comment #0)
> Congratulations on hitting the 10,000 reports mark!
>
> https://godbolt.org/z/dhPqd4595
>
> template
> auto f(Ts...) {
> [] { enum class e : Ts {}; };
> }
>
> int main() {
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-09
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99989
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 regression] False |[11 regression]
|maybe-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16
--- Comment #3 from 康桓瑋 ---
https://godbolt.org/z/o6h8GP6ae
Maybe same form:
template
auto f() {
[] { struct S : Ts {}; };
}
int main() {
f<>();
}
:3:15: internal compiler error: in dependent_type_p, at cp/pt.c:26745
3 | [] { stru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> I don't understand what is wrong about that.
> (clobber:TI (const_int 0 [0])) in there stands for couldn't figure out what
> this value is or how to repres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #4 from Thiago Macieira ---
That's an artificial (pun intended) limitation.
In C++:
template
int fill_array(Generator generator, unsigned long long *rand_array)
Also errors out with the same error, but works if you do:
fill_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Neither always_inline nor artificial attribute means that you can't take
addresses of those inlines, but
1) I don't think anything implies the intrinsics must be implemented as inline
functions, after all, g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47307
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2017-12-30 00:00:00 |2021-4-9
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #6 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> then one would get an out of line copy when taking their address, but it
> would
> duplicated in all the TUs that did this.
That's not a problem, since that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17
Bug ID: 17
Summary: Parameter packs not expanded with bit field
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looking at clang, they have significantly more intrinsics than GCC implemented
as macros (GCC typically only implements those that have to be macros at -O0
for immediates, while I can't find any particular p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
I don't think we need to support taking address of intrinsic.
By definition, there is no intrinsic address to take.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97858
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-11-17 00:00:00 |2021-4-9
Summary|Bogus warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96372
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96372
akrl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97726
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98049
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-11-30 00:00:00 |2021-4-9
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98049
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98952
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18
Bug ID: 18
Summary: std::clamp generates suboptimal assembly for primitive
types
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94775
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99547
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Dup of bug 96733?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Andrew, this isn't really specific to a single target, rough numbers of
extern inline __gnu_inline__ intrinsics are:
14 config/s390
120 config/sparc
603 config/rs6000
4044 config/aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99180
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
101 - 200 of 265 matches
Mail list logo
